My Top 1000 Song List

I have been thinking about it for a while, and I decided it would be a great idea for people to get to know each other if different folks that feel the need posted on their blog (or what have you), a top 1000 song list.  So I thought I would start a rough draft one, just for fun, that I update and edit regularly. Here are some of the ones I would begin with on my own list.  This list is no way in proper order of importance, and probably will not be for some time.  But here are some of the songs that might be on it.  This list is in a random order.  Only after I reach the listing of some 100 or so will I attempt to begin putting the ones I favor the most at the top of the list, on downward in order of actual preference.

  1. Backstreet boys —       a. shape of my heart  b. drowning   c. Incomplete

2. Kenny Chesney            a.    You had me from hello     b.  There Goes My Life    c.  Don’t Blink

3.  Lonestar                      Not a Day Goes By

4.   Avril Lavigne             When You’re Gone

5.  Doug Stone                  In a Different Light

6.   John Denver              a.  I’m Sorry    b. Annie’s Song

7.   England Dan, J.F. Coley     a.   Gone too Far    b.  Never have to say goodbye again

8.  Chicago                        a. Will you still love me

9.  Bryan Adams             a.  Here I am

10.  Debbie Gibson         Lost in Your Eyes

11.  Ptolemy Craig     [Songs I am writing] [You had better like your own songs, if not, what the H&^* are you doing writing music you don’t even like?][I count my songs as but a single entry].

a.   More Than You Know    b. It’s Not Enough    c. Stefanie’s Song    d.  Arielle’s Laughter  e. Theodora’s Song   f.  The Creator’s Song   g.  Alexandria’s Song   h. Samantha’s Song  i. live for the music  j. various remakes [A few others]

12. Lady Antebellum          Just A Kiss

13. David Gates/ Bread      Everything I Own

14.   REO Speedwagon        I Can’t Fight This Feeling

15.  Boston                            Amanda

16.   Barry Manilow             Mandy

17.  Taylor Swift                   a.   Back To December    b. Sparks Fly    c. Red

18.  Peter Cetera/ Cher        After all

19.  Keith Urban                  [TBA, not sure yet which one (s)]

20. Brad Paisley                 Good Morning Beautiful

21.  Lionel Richie               Stuck On You

22.  Orleans                       Love Takes Time

23.  Air Supply                  [Selections]

24.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Veganism as Mandate: Holding Fast to the Light of Nature

      Every once in a while we discover something we believe we should have either known all along, or else discovered much earlier. This is the kind of thing I have learned about Veganism, by which I mean eating no animal proteins at all, not merely vegetarianism, or eating no meat.  As I see it, I have became a vegan far too late in life; but as we say, later is better than never.

The Bible, well refuted on this blog many times over, does have an interesting (though misguided) memory which involves the prohibition of mixing two fundamentally different kinds of things.  For my money, it hardly matters whether or not one wears clothing made of both wool and flax, or eats “bugs” of this kind (with one characteristic) but not that kind, which perhaps mixes two different kinds of traits together in a forbidden combination.

I believe that this distorted memory of the biblical record actually aims at the mixing of animal proteins with that of humans, which is so unnatural if you think about it as to approximate the Island of Dr. Moreaux.   The proteins of animals, when consumed by humans inculcates the animal flesh and makes it one with the humans who eat it – not too far from detestable beastiality, which has a similar result.

We are what we eat in a very real sense.   To be faithful to God and to one another, we must be pure-hearts and faithfully follow our divinely-appointed diet and lifestyle — we should not have animal skin footballs either (clothes and furniture likewise).

The medical sense so popular today that we absolutely need simple proteins ignores what should be the obvious mismatch between animals and humans. (Solomon shows great concern for what is fitting — just what matches what or does not fit with the other kind of thing). Doubtless some will decry the faulty analogy between genetics and metabolism they will say I imply here.  But this ignores the primary point — design.

On a practical note, I have begun thinking about the possibility of making cheese out of the kind of milk — almond milk or soy milk — we do not usually associate with the dairy counterpart (cow cheese we are used to thinking of simply as “cheese”). I plan to continue musing about such topics and may post more about this topic later.

Deconstructing the Devil: Jesus and Lucifer, the Untold Story

The very idea of a devil, a personal and ultimate representative of evil is not very new.  In fact, the Zoroastrians held that the god of light and wisdom, Ahuri-Mazda, waged a constant battle against his nemesis, Ahriman, the god of darkness and evil, in a quite protracted (never-ending) battle.  I call this mythological phenomenon a Paired Polarity.  One has to have to the one to render the other intelligible, as a way (only the two together do this) to explain human experience of both the good and the evil we see around us.  Paired Polarities display what you might call a “package deal,” since the explaining intended needs to account for BOTH good and evil in the world, so every batman needs a joker, just as Thor needs Loki.

In the biblical galaxy, Jesus needs Lucifer in very important ways, since the latter is responsible for plunging the world into the darkness of sin.  Consider this: on the Christian view, without the devil, Jesus would be out of work — we would not need redemption (without sin), and would not need Jesus. Without that fall, we would be living in a sin- and disease-free paradise.  This means we would not need to cast out demons (See the Gospels on this ministry of Jesus), do miracles, be redeemed.  And there would be no sins to forgive.  Without the devil, there could have been no one to betray Jesus, or lead Judas to have Jesus executed — and thus no redemption would have obtained without the bad guys.  This would, of course, render the Bible unintelligible itself, as well as unnecessary.  Prophecy of a Messiah who does not need to save anyone from anything — has no reason to show up at all in history.

This proves that Jesus and Lucifer form a fairly standard kind of paired polarity.   As mentioned before, these exist as a conceptual unit, and this should have suggested something rather important that even the skeptics among us have failed to notice.  Satan is not an historical person — at least not to skeptics and scientific types, like Solomonic deists, Atheists, Agnostics, etc.   This strongly suggests that Jesus is not historical either.  The temptation accounts of Matthew and Luke show rather clearly the two as a single conceptual (literary) unit.  Neither one has ever actually existed, and our suspicions about the bad guy in this mythic story should have sparked a like distrust of the other.  There neither is nor was, an “historical Jesus,” any more than there was an historical Thor.

Our suspicions that the devil was a propped-up dummy of an sufficient explanation for the existence of evil (but then we also need the World, flesh and the devil as enemies to explain it — 1 John), should have hinted that the Bible actually offers 2 scarecrows (Jesus and Lucifer), not one only, to explain the scorched cornfields of human history.