Printable View
Matter of religion....Quote:
Originally Posted by donKey jote
The orthodox christian church is definitely against this kind of marriages. Even if a law adopted by the Parliament wll ever accept a union-marriage this will be only a civil act. Church rules are different and adopted by the synod.
Those who never invited mates in their home used to have something to hide. :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Usually a wellfare hard to be explained on those times. :D
Good for you but once again I come and ask why are you so angry on church regarding same sex mariages? What's the need of the blessing of a meaningless authority?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
As an individual, you should be able to refuse entry to whoever you wish. This is where I don't quite follow the decrimination aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Forcing the issue will only result in resentment by those have been forced, against their wishes, to allow all and sundry entry to their establishment.
You wouldn't allow Mr Tattoo and his mates, pierced beyond belief looking like a meccano set was glued to their face clutching cans of Special Brew in, would you?
The Bible is a book. If we change it then we have the right to change every book to adapt its meaning to modern times and become poltically correct. From Shakespear's work to Confucius's, from Francoise Villon's to Dante Alligheri's, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Romeo and Juliet, a modern playright rewritten by Ioan...( sorry Ioan, but since you always ridicule my examples...)
Don Quijote written in donkey jote's style ( sorry donkey, I know you have a good sense of humour to understand it's a joke )
Rappaccini's Daughter improved by the forum's doctor ( sorry Doc, I know you think it's a masterpiece so it can't be improved)
Let's see who dares to change the Koran....
I see where you are coming from, and understand the principal.Quote:
Originally Posted by gadjo_dilo
However, the Bible advocates stoning etc, and I don't really think we should continue doing that. Adjust punishments accordingly.
Does this mean we should change other principals? Personally I don't, and I'm not going to labour my point because I've said my piece already. Others are free to make thier own interpretations etc.
I know you've said this sarcastically, but its not a comparison. How would you know who votes for who? Would you ask them on their way in?!Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Just treated myself with a Christmas present, a book by one of my fav authors ( a romanian philosopher ). It's title is Jesus's Parables and the preface says:Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
"There are questions which can be answered promptly and appropriate. From those of current experience (what number you wear shoes?) To those of scientific expertise (What is gravity?). There are also questions those of early childhood, which seem simple, or surreal, but whose answer calls rather metaphysical talent or imagination: Why does hand five fingers?, Who invented sleep? There are, finally, the questions "big" questions ultimatum, which I like to call "Russian" for doing the dostoievskyan substance of many sleepless nights: What is happiness?, Why does evil exist?, What is the meaning of life?
For such questions, you can not propose a geometric response, but an analogy, a metaphor, a transfigured "detour" . It is the most appropriate solution. Only. Instead of saying, scholar "how things look", saying: "Let's just tell you a story."
In this book will be about the stories told by Jesus in his effort to familiarize others with the metabolism of His kingdom. Task which he assumes is impossible, so is the extent of his divinity:'s talking about unevident things, having to offer help, without falling into the recipe and abuse of doctrine, and has to give not only matter for reflection, but also motivation of life and existential support."
( Now I reckon our mutual friend Ioan will be again smirking at the thought of my absurd examples :laugh :) .
It makes me think that we should look behind the “stories” from the Bible, some of them reflects realities of that time, some of them reflects things that happen on spiritual-divine level that people of that time couldn’t explain.
Coming back to the power of example ( just to annoy Ioan…. ) , let’s just take the common prayer “Give us this day our daily bread” . I’m sure the sense is of a spiritual bread not the material bread as Jesus hasn’t come to feed people.
That’s an oversimplification. The scripture of the Bible is a recount of the history of how Christianity came to be. This scripture has been revised over the years to benefit the supremacy of the church at any given time. This has resulted in the multiple versions of the Bible we see today.Quote:
Originally Posted by gadjo_dilo
There is nothing stopping a church from revising yet again :mark: .
As I understand it the text in the Q’ran has always been the original scripture as transcribed by Muhammad. In fact, Islam forbids any edits or modifications to the text. Thus it is far more a “pure” holy scripture than the Christian bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by gadjo_dilo
Sorry… off topic here.