User Tag List

First 21011121314 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 131

  1. #111
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    In my judgment, the text is clear enough to provide honest answers to honest inquiry. If you start from the position that you want to twist a passage to serve your own ends, you're screwed from the beginning... but this is not a fault that can be attributed to the text, translated or not.

    If your comment was to address the proliferation of denominations and sects in Christianity based on varying interpretations of scripture, again that is a fault that cannot truly be blamed on the text. The text is what it is.

    If you consider the attempt to derive some kind of cogent belief system out of such a diverse group of books as those that make up the Christian bible to be futile, well...

    Like I said: Good luck with that.
    In my judgment, my text was clear enough that honest inquiry should have yielded an answer that I wasn't blaming the text. I'm blaming the idiots who read it [wrong]. I said explicitly that it's not the fault of the text, and you still come at me with a rebuttal as if I said that it was.

    I'm saying, people make false perceptions and judgements. Can I be any more clear? Can someone clarify that for me? Apparently I've not learned to weave words in a way that I can say one thing and have it interpreted as such. Sort of like the bible, as it's proven to be such.
    we fukin won boys

  2. #112
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Aw man... I gotta go to work. Don't anyone say anything too poignant while I'm gone. I don't want to miss it. Though in a religion argument thread, I probably don't have anything to worry about.
    we fukin won boys

  3. #113
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    Because it's not "clearly visible," though I freely admit it's part of the zeitgeist at present.
    You honestly can't think of some times people have used the Bible to further political agendas?

    The Crusades
    The Subjugation of women
    The American institution of Slavery
    The American institution of Segregation
    The Discrimination of Homosexuals
    The Iraq war (when good ol' Bush said that he believed God wanted him to invade)

    Just to name a few off the top of my head.

    People have been using the name of God and Jesus through loose interpretations of the Bible in order to justify their political actions for centuries! This isn't a product of the times, it is a product of religious ideology mixed with political agenda. It's human history.

  4. #114
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    So you favor including more diverse groups in your inquiry, in the interest of proving a greater disparity of "christian" doctrine?

    Well, certainly. If you'll include animists in the mix things get even more loopy.
    See, what we have here is the gospels that maintain Jesus is god in our cannon. Many other followers of Jesus maintain that he was not god, just a wise teacher. The soundness of a gospel is to be determined in accordance to its faithfulness to the original teaching of Jesus. We dont know if what Jesus truly taught was in line with what Catholics and Protestants teach, or what is in the canon now. One can plausibly argue that the Gnostic writings are equally deserving of being canonized as those that we have in our canon. The point here has nothing to do with making it more diverse but with finding the teaching that is most in line with what Jesus preached. Our reason for embracing the current Christianity as the teaching of Jesus was inspired wholly by Constantine's appraisal of this spiritual faith. There was no sound argument given in favor of the proposition that this teaching is more representative of the views of Jesus than the rival ones, such as the Gnostic. They merit our consideration in order to ensure we've established the most authoritative doctrines.


    But the real problem is not what teachings we accept as Orthodox and authoritative, but with how people only pay lip service to this or that dogma yet continue to practice the teaching in a fashion most favorable to themselves.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  5. #115
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    You honestly can't think of some times people have used the Bible to further political agendas?

    The Crusades
    The Subjugation of women
    The American institution of Slavery
    The American institution of Segregation
    The Discrimination of Homosexuals
    The Iraq war (when good ol' Bush said that he believed God wanted him to invade)

    Just to name a few off the top of my head.

    People have been using the name of God and Jesus through loose interpretations of the Bible in order to justify their political actions for centuries! This isn't a product of the times, it is a product of religious ideology mixed with political agenda. It's human history.
    Are you a woman?

    Also, 'manifest destiny' as number seven.
    we fukin won boys

  6. #116
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    I've been thinking about how to say this in as few words as possible.


    It should be taken as literally as it can be morally literally applied.


    Tadaa! My original 400 words down to 13! I was aiming for ten, but no go. I'm not sure this is even a correct sentance (it can be parsed more than one way...). Well, I suck at languages, so meh.

  7. #117
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I've been thinking about how to say this in as few words as possible:
    It should be taken as literally as it can be morally literally applied.


    oops.. sorry, i forgot... i en't allowed ta bow down before no udder gods, even if de're Ptgatsby...
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #118
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    One of the problems is when people TAKE the Bible as a religious text, singular. It isn't. It's lots of different texts, all conveniently bound up in one volume.

    If you were Jewish in the Roman period and you wanted to read the book of Isaiah, you'd have gone into the synagogue and asked for the scroll of Isaiah. You would have been aware that this was 'one of many'. You would not necessarily have felt the need to hold it alongside the scroll of Deuteronomy and check for consistency, nor would you expect that lack of consistency would necessarily invalidate either text. edit - this would, IMO, have created a greater sense of perspective as to the context-bound areas of scripture; a better sense of the latter superceding the former, and of certain parts having been written for certain times and situations, therefore no longer necessarily binding at the present time (whenever that was).

    Not only was the Bible in one volume as we know it today, an artificial creation long after its constituent parts were written, but the division into chapters and verses is even more recent and artificial, done for the convenience of modern era printers.

    I believe all of these innovations make a difference as to how the Bible is taken, what's expected of it, etc.

    When you have one volume, you sorta expect everything within it to be 'a story'; to be coherent, and corroborative with itself.

    I don't think St Paul thought of his letters to his friends as being on a par in authority with the Ten Commandments, but many modern Christians do. When he said 'All scripture is inspired of God', I don't think he was referring to his own letters but to those texts he considered as Scripture - no official 'Gospels' yet; and yet that quotation is taken as evidence of the bindingness of those letters on others.

    and fwiw pt, that was awesome
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  9. #119
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Oh, and I also think y'all should think for a bit on the implications of the concept of "scripture" or just writing, period, for a culture of mass illiteracy. I mean really imagine if you had absolutely no idea what writing was all about or how it was done; imagine nobody you talk to on a regular basis does, and everyone you know of who can write and read is a figure you consider holy and authoritative.

    What effect would that have on the importance/level of awe that you feel towards the written word?

    Think of all the superstitions that have arisen from the sense of awe and 'magic' that has surrounded the concept of literacy in mass illiterate cultures. For example, in China a Taoist priest would write 'blessings' on pieces of paper for someone to tear off the pad and scatter on the wind whilst ringing bells. There are all kinds of superstitions in European history involving the inscribing of letters and/or words in 'magic' practices. Why would it matter to scatter those pieces of paper? Why is it any different or better than just saying the words they denote, yourself?

    If you don't understand how writing works and see it as a closely guarded secret of the elite, then you might consider it 'magic' or evidence of some kind of divine favour, that these people can recall, perfectly, in vivid detail and exact replica, words that were spoken long ago by others before they were born. You might well consider it 'magic' that this mere scratched symbol on a piece of wood can be recognized by certain people to represent something holy or sacred. How do they know what it says? Is it because they've all just learned to read? Or is it because the symbol itself is magical and transmits its meaning to those it deems worthy?

    I'm just saying this by way of keeping a bit of context, historically, on what motives or impressions people might've had in the past for viewing the written word as sacred or particularly authoritative.
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  10. #120
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    Are you a woman?
    Nope.

Similar Threads

  1. Should the world be taught to slow the fuck down?
    By Cellmold in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-07-2013, 11:12 PM
  2. Should the pr0n industry be regulated?
    By proteanmix in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 07:07 AM
  3. How literally should the constitution be taken?
    By Nocapszy in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 12-19-2007, 10:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO