RicOlie_2

G-1d

^Thank you

S-2e

darth_ender said:

The second error, probably more serious, was when I took my rook to 4a and promoted it on turn 21, checking your king.  You moved him to a safe square.  Nevertheless, you had three pieces at your disposal: a silver and two bishops, just waiting to be dropped.  If you'd dropped them next to your king to block the check, it would have been harder for me to checkmate you, as you'd be both building your defenses and replenishing your depleted army simultaneously with pieces you could potentially counterattack with at a later turn.

Yes, that did me in. I had planned to get my king out of the way and then corner your rooks, but you kept me on my toes the whole time after that, so I didn't have any opportunity to do so.

Hope this helps.  You're learning fast, and soon I expect you'll beat me!  I'd love to play Goro Goro.  I've never tried it before, and I'm anxious to give it a go.  I say you go first this time.

 G-1e

^LOL, that's the first thing I heard when I turned on the radio yesterday evening. :)

I was just listening to some of the Piano Guys' music. I encourage you to check them out if you haven't heard of them before.

Nah, I'm not getting discouraged. I find it helps when you point out my fatal errors because it helps me avoid them in the future, but don't go easy on me any more than you are. I still enjoy playing, as long as you don't obliterate me right away. It's the playing I enjoy the most, not winning, so as long as you aren't completely in control I enjoy myself as much as I would were I winning. I think I'm getting better as we go, so I say keep going as we are and eventually we'll be more evenly matched than now. :)

How about a game of Goro Goro Shogi next?

January 22:

A.D. 871: The Danes defeat the British, led by Ethelred of Wessex, in the Battle of Basing.

A.D. 1506: The first Swiss guards arrive at the Vatican.

Those guys have been there longer than I realized.

A.D. 1521: Charles V opens the Diet of Worms.

Can kings take kings in Shogi? If so, it's checkmate next turn.

EDIT: Never mind, but it'll be darn close.

K-3e

I moved you to the wrong spot a couple moves back and didn't realize how much trouble I was in. I thought I could hold out a bit longer, but now I don't think I have much time left before you get me for good.

darth_ender said:

Actually analyzing the board, I can force a mate in a couple of moves and there's nothing you can do about it >:D

 Yes, as long as you keep me in check. I might be able to make a come back if you don't.

K-2d

I hope I can last long enough to make a counterattack...

K-3c

K-2b

K-1b

Gx2c

B*3b

EDIT: Can I take that back and make my move S-2c?

S-1b

Rx5b

S-2a

R-5a

No worries if you do.

P-1c

That wasn't in a theocracy, and it wasn't fine for Hitler to make a decision like that. It is contrary to the Christological law which superceded the Mosaic law.

Bingowings said:

So...hang on... you are saying that this a medicinal painful execution...applied to a sickness as a means to avoid an eternity in a realm (which doesn't actually exist in Jewish mythology) but was created by the same diety?

Sort of, but it depends on whether or not I understand what you're asking.

The Jews of Levitican times believed all people (good or bad with a few exemptions like Enoch) ended up in Sheol. Which wasn't a place of punishment until it was translated into Greek and became associated with Hades or translated into medieval Nordic/Germanic languages and became associated with Hel.

No, the Jews didn't/don't believe in hell, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

The stoning for them was a form of living burial (the dead were buried under a pile of stones) not a cure or a mercy, just a disposal.

Catholics of a few centuries back thought burning people accused of witchcraft after confessing (usually after torture) spared them from Hellfire. Your view is more akin to that evil nonsense than the evil earlier nonsense.

Executions have no purpose anymore since Jesus' crucifixion and the introduction of Reconciliation/Confession.

Either way the God you are describing is one hell of a mixed up character.

He makes man with free will, orders him not to do something, then punishes the species with painful death followed by eternal torment if you don't say sorry and agree it was a fair punishment.

Maybe, but more likely those people would go to purgatory. AFAIK, it is not Church doctrine that hell is a place of eternal torment, though that is the traditional view. Hell is an absence of God, which could add up to torture, but since no one has ever experienced God's absence if God is real, we can't say how bad that is.

To paraphrase Flash Gordon, this God is a psycho or maybe it's just his followers?

 Sure seems that way at first glance. I don't think the Bible portrays him as such though, and it is important to read the Biblical stories in context, not from a modern view of the world.

Still yes, but if it was an alternate punishment to hell, it was a loving alternative. Maybe it doesn't seem that way, but I'd take finite punishment over infinite punishment any day.

Yes, but only members of that theocracy. I think that the stoning might have been to make up for the sin so that the person wouldn't end up in hell, but of course that's just an opinion.