Time For a Vintage Batman Thread: Where Will We Finish in the Standings?

[spycam1]

I'm predicting 6th. Of the 7 bottom feeders, I think Sactown is the only one we finish worse than. Philly and Milwaukee are on another planet, Orlando is pretty untouchable too, and Boston and LA will be willing to play dirty in ways the Jazz aren't.

 

[Deleted member 365]

I will feel good about the tank if we can survive the next few games against fellow tankers. If we can dump tomorrow's game against the celtics that would kick things off quite nicely. Hopefully Favors stays out for a little while longer. Our tank would take a serious hit if kanter and favors could team up. Yikes!

Nah, who am I kidding? Corbin isn't smart enough to play them both at the same time, right?

 

[addictionary]

I've already had my bet about this somewhere. I go with the 6th pick in two thousand and fourteen NBA Draft.

(it will be weird when we hear that line from someone else)

 

[franklin]

5th, and the ping pong balls have a memory.

 

[Sexual Favors]

I said 6th, but I'm fearful we're 8th. New York is creeping up on us, and there not even trying to suck.

We've played ourselves out of (standing wise, could get some ping pong luck) the top tier of Parker, Wiggins, and Embiid.

The dark horse of Exum seems elusive.

Randle or Smart don't excite me much, but they are light-years beyond Aaron Gordon (would be different if he was taller and could hit his FT's), Noah Vonleh, and Dario Saric's pathetic asses.

If one of those top 4 guys don't declare, then we are really screwed.

 

[Doublea]

I said 6th, but I'm fearful we're 8th. New York is creeping up on us, and there not even trying to suck.

We've played ourselves out of (standing wise, could get some ping pong luck) the top tier of Parker, Wiggins, and Embiid.

The dark horse of Exum seems elusive.

Randle or Smart don't excite me much, but they are light-years beyond Aaron Gordon (would be different if he was taller and could hit his FT's), Noah Vonleh, and Dario Saric's pathetic asses.

If one of those top 4 guys don't declare, then we are really screwed.

I'm just hoping to get a pick 4-6, that way we still have a pretty good chance at jumping into the top 3. 7th is all right... 8th I would be pretty sad..

 

[Stifle Tower]

I'm just hoping to get a pick 4-6, that way we still have a pretty good chance at jumping into the top 3. 7th is all right... 8th I would be pretty sad..

How do you feel about 11th or 12th?
New Orleans and Detroit are also slipping. And it's not inconceivable Utah catches Denver.

Right now, I think 7th might be "best case." Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Orlando, Lakers, Boston and NY are losing and losing often. Utah is about to embark on a very easy road trip with a healthy team. Expect the Jazz to win 3 or 4 of their next 7 games. I see Utah finishing with 28-30 wins.

 

[Harambe]

Are we talking Michael Keaton or Adam West?

 

[carolinajazz]

When the season started, Jazzfanz were as splintered on how the season would go as Christians were on the nature of God before the council of Nicaea.

....personally, I think it more fun, beneficial and appropriate to discuss the: The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪ'si:ə/; Greek: Νίκαια /'ni:kaɪja/ Turkish: Iznik) was a council of Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in Bithynia by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. This first ecumenical council was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.

Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the nature of the Son of God and his relationship to God the Father, the construction of the first part of the Creed of Nicaea, establishing uniform observance of the date of Easter, and promulgation of early canon law.

Regarding the results of that council, the Encyclopaedia Britannica says: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed .*.*. the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance [ho·mo·ou′si·os] with the Father.’ .*.*. Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”

Did this pagan ruler intervene because of his Biblical convictions? No. A Short History of Christian Doctrine states: “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology.” What he did understand was that religious disputes threatened the unity of his empire, and he wanted them resolved.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Volume*14, page*299, acknowledges: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th*century. .*.*. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”

The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1985, Micropædia, Volume*11, page*928, says under the subject of Trinity: “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O*Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.’ (Deut. 6:4)”

The New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Volume*14, page*299, acknowledges: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th*century. .*.*. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”

Thus, the Trinity doctrine is not Scriptural, but it was officially adopted at the Council of Nicaea in the year 325*C.E. The doctrine incorporated a pagan idea that had originated long before in ancient Babylon and Egypt and was in use in other lands as well. Historian Will Durant observed in The Story of Civilization: Part*III, page*595: “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. .*.*. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity.”

History confirms that the Trinity was borrowed from pagans and was in existence centuries before Jesus came to the earth. Long after his death, it was promoted by those who had been influenced by pagan philosophies and who had apostatized from the true worship of God as taught by Jesus and the apostles.

....in conclusion...I voted 9th. pick and 22nd place. As you guys know, when it comes to the NBA....I'm ALWAYS a half EMPTY type of guy!

 

[Batman]

....personally, I think it more fun, beneficial and appropriate to discuss the: The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪ'si:ə/; Greek: Νίκαια /'ni:kaɪja/ Turkish: Iznik) was a council of Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in Bithynia by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. This first ecumenical council was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.

Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the nature of the Son of God and his relationship to God the Father, the construction of the first part of the Creed of Nicaea, establishing uniform observance of the date of Easter, and promulgation of early canon law.

Regarding the results of that council, the Encyclopaedia Britannica says: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed .*.*. the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance [ho·mo·ou′si·os] with the Father.’ .*.*. Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”

Did this pagan ruler intervene because of his Biblical convictions? No. A Short History of Christian Doctrine states: “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology.” What he did understand was that religious disputes threatened the unity of his empire, and he wanted them resolved.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Volume*14, page*299, acknowledges: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th*century. .*.*. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”

The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1985, Micropædia, Volume*11, page*928, says under the subject of Trinity: “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O*Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.’ (Deut. 6:4)”

The New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Volume*14, page*299, acknowledges: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th*century. .*.*. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”

Thus, the Trinity doctrine is not Scriptural, but it was officially adopted at the Council of Nicaea in the year 325*C.E. The doctrine incorporated a pagan idea that had originated long before in ancient Babylon and Egypt and was in use in other lands as well. Historian Will Durant observed in The Story of Civilization: Part*III, page*595: “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. .*.*. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity.”

History confirms that the Trinity was borrowed from pagans and was in existence centuries before Jesus came to the earth. Long after his death, it was promoted by those who had been influenced by pagan philosophies and who had apostatized from the true worship of God as taught by Jesus and the apostles.

....in conclusion...I voted 9th. pick and 22nd place. As you guys know, when it comes to the NBA....I'm ALWAYS a half EMPTY type of guy!

I'm just going to assume you are LDS

 

[carolinajazz]

I'm just going to assume you are LDS

....no. And don't LDS believe in the "Trinity?"

 

[Batman]

....no. And don't LDS believe in the "Trinity?"

Nah. Mormons believe in the Godhead. They believe that God is the Father of our spirits, Jesus Christ is his only begotten son in the flesh and that the main mission of the holy ghost is to bare witness of this truth. Furthermore, Mormons believe that Jesus Christ, God, and the Holy Ghost are all distinct and separate personages.

Personally, I agree whole heartily with the LDS view of heaven. I think the destiny of man is to become like God. It just makes too much sense. Paul said it best: "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."

Jesus also taught this: "The disciple is not above his master nor the servant above his Lord. But it is enough that the disciple should be as his master and the servant as his lord."

Makes sense that God as our Father would want us to be as he is: Perfect.

I think Joseph Smith had that one right.