What's new
By:

The Church of Double-Dian Garrett

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 848
  • Start date Start date
I was impressed with the guy. Great attitude, and to come in and make plays and contribute on such short notice like that says a lot about his instinct as a PG. Great move by the Jazz.
 
He's not going to be that good every game, especially after he is scouted, but he will at least try to pass the ball in ways that give us an edge, and that alone makes him worth having around.
 
JazzSpazz said:
I agree that I liked his decision making for the most part and his passing. It was nice to see him hit shots and force the defender to stay within 5 feet of him. I like him, but one game does not an all star make. Great start though.
Click to expand...

True his accomplishments in this game do not make him an all star, but replacing JL3 kind of does. Perspective, we just received a large dose.
 
cctrackstar said:
He's not going to be that good every game, especially after he is scouted, but he will at least try to pass the ball in ways that give us an edge, and that alone makes him worth having around.
Click to expand...

He'll be better. Jeremy Lin 2013-2014 edition. We're on the anti-Tank train now baby. 7th or 8th seed on the horizon.
 
Duck Rodgers said:
He'll be better. Jeremy Lin 2013-2014 edition. We're on the anti-Tank train now baby. 7th or 8th seed on the horizon.
Click to expand...

In his preseason game on October 22 with OKC he had decent stats not worldbeating but decent. Like Harris this isn't his first rodeo. If Lucas has another couple of nights like last night eat his contract and bring up a youngun or two and see what they can do.
 
addictionary said:
Aren't you Muslim? You should start a Mosque, not a church. Or a temple to call for the multi-religious crowd.
Click to expand...

From wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociological_classifications_of_religious_movements):

The church classification describes religions that are all-embracing of religious expression in a society. Religions of this type are the guardians of religion for all members of the societies in which they are located and tolerate no religious competition. They also strive to provide an all-encompassing worldview for their adherents and are typically enmeshed with the political and economic structures of society.
Johnstone provides the following seven characteristics of churches:[2]
Claim universality, include all members of the society within their ranks, and have a strong tendency to equate "citizenship" with "membership"
Exercise religious monopoly and try to eliminate religious competition
Are very closely allied with the state and secular powers; frequently there is overlapping of responsibilities and much mutual reinforcement
Are extensively organized as a hierarchical bureaucratic institution with a complex division of labor
Employ professional, full-time clergy who possess the appropriate credentials of education and formal ordination
Primarily gain new members through natural reproduction and the socialization of children into the ranks
Allow for diversity by creating different groups within the church (e.g., orders of nuns or monks) rather than through the formation of new religions
Click to expand...

tl;dr --> The term 'church' is not an exclusively 'Christian' term. This is how I typically use it. RCC is a church, Islam is a church, etc.
 
addictionary said:
Okay bro thanks. The translation of some random words disinformates my humble being on rareness.
Click to expand...

No problemo man-- it always perplexes me how amazing the English of you, along with your Turkish counterparts, is (here on Jazzfanz). I just tend to borrow lots of lingo from various sociologists, so my syntax can be a bit murky sometimes.
 
dalamon said:
From wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociological_classifications_of_religious_movements):



tl;dr --> The term 'church' is not an exclusively 'Christian' term. This is how I typically use it. RCC is a church, Islam is a church, etc.
Click to expand...


Though I do believe the quoted definition is slightly sided point of view. In practical view, one can suggest the absolute opposite of how the concept of church defined. And calling the situation of having both a group of nuns and a group of priests "diversity" sounds really really lame to my hardly hearing ears.
 
dalamon said:
No problemo man-- it always perplexes me how amazing the English of you, along with your Turkish counterparts, is (here on Jazzfanz). I just tend to borrow lots of lingo from various sociologists, so my syntax can be a bit murky sometimes.
Click to expand...


Wha?! U a fellow sociologist dawg?!
 
I was amazed with his patients and his floor vision. Our offense changed the second he checked in. Anyone but JLIII.
 
addictionary said:
Wha?! U a fellow sociologist dawg?!
Click to expand...

I read lots of it, and take courses in it, but I'm a Genetics major in University right now. Physical Sciences minor. Sociology is more of a hobby for me-- but if you ever want to talk about T4 bacteriophages, transposons, or any transcription signal transduction pathways, I'm down with that as well :)
 
addictionary said:
Though I do believe the quoted definition is slightly sided point of view. In practical view, one can suggest the absolute opposite of how the concept of church defined. And calling the situation of having both a group of nuns and a group of priests "diversity" sounds really really lame to my hardly hearing ears.
Click to expand...

That, of course, is merely Johnstone's interpretation of what he constitutes a 'church' to be. There are many other interpretations of it-- I am not trying to convince you that it is objective, or the 'best' way of defining it; I am merely pointing out the etymology behind my usage of the word (although personally, using church in this context is something that makes perfect sense to me :) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top