Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[misko27]

And of course they don't mention the part where Jesus said it's ok to eat just about anything and when it's reaffirmed later in the New Testament.

How about a human child? How about drinking the blood of an infant? How bout a unbaptized infant? What about A Arch-Angel? What about my parents? What about my local priest?

[Sheb]

Did Jesus said that? From what I remember, Paul had a vision of god saying ti was okay to eat any animals, and then it went down as part of the PR package by the early church for non-Jew convert.

[10ebbor10]

And of course they don't mention the part where Jesus said it's ok to eat just about anything and when it's reaffirmed later in the New Testament.

How about a human child? How about drinking the blood of an infant? How bout a unbaptized infant? What about A Arch-Angel? What about my parents? What about my local priest?

I'd like quotations for that. 3 to 1 your using the wrong intrepretation. The church has some rather nice catch all's for stuff like those:

Any people reading and intrepreting the Bible needs to have an attitude inspired by the 7 virtues. Further on any intrepretation needs to lead to an increase in belief, hope and love. Litteral intrepretations that do not conform to these rules need to be dropped in favour of methaporical ones. 

[Nadaka]

Gotta love methaporical interpretations.

[10ebbor10]

Gotta love methaporical interpretations.

and allegorical, and whatever other intrepretations you got out there.

[Euld]

Mathew 15:1-20  The "zinger" is verses 16-20.

I am in no way arguing a "proper" way to interpret the Bible, nor am I going to argue about the "logic" of the Bible.  Yes, technically someone could read this verse and conclude cannibalism but I'm not going to argue that either, ick.  I'm only saying one thing: Jesus talks about the relation (or lack of) between sin and food in this one section, thus the Bible addressed the subject relating to sin and food more than twice.  That's it.

[Nadaka]

Gotta love methaporical interpretations.

and allegorical, and whatever other intrepretations you got out there.

I was making a bad joke about the speIling.

[10ebbor10]

Gotta love methaporical interpretations.

and allegorical, and whatever other intrepretations you got out there.

I was making a bad joke about the speIling.

I'm tired, English is not my first language and bloody hell do  I care about a language that uses h's everywhere it doesn't need to .

[Euld]

I, for one, would welcome a radical change to the English language to make it easier to learn and more consistent.  But that's just me.

[Flying Dice]

Half the charm of English is that it's such an inconsistent pain, though. Insert old joke here.

[scriver]

I don't get it. The stigma against meat eaters is from Hinduism, but the justification is from Christianity?

Welcome to the world known as earth!

May I take your bags? No guarantees they'll be returned intact!

Eastern mysticism-inspired Christianity or Abrahamaic-inspired Hinduism or Buddhism. It's not exactly unheard of.

Mathew 15:1-20  The "zinger" is verses 16-20.

I am in no way arguing a "proper" way to interpret the Bible, nor am I going to argue about the "logic" of the Bible.  Yes, technically someone could read this verse and conclude cannibalism but I'm not going to argue that either, ick.  I'm only saying one thing: Jesus talks about the relation (or lack of) between sin and food in this one section, thus the Bible addressed the subject relating to sin and food more than twice.  That's it.

Reading that list of sins, it seems to me those lines are the very basis for what they think of meat-eaters.

[Reelya]

Ack! in 2008 Colombia bombed Ecuador (killing the Colombian rebel's peace negotiation team and accusing them of launching attacks from that base) and threatened Venezuela with the same. And the Colombian & US media + politicians labelled Ecuador + Venezuela as the aggressors.

Now it's been publicly admitted that in 2009 Colombia flew American-made drones over the border with Venezuela to the deep jungle, in preparation to attack...guess who? The rebels latest peace-negotiator. Who, just like the last guy, they would label as plotting attacks with the collusion of a neighboring country - all countries which coincidentally used to be colonial assets of Gran Colombia...

The damn Colombian fascist government leave active, violent, kidnapping, rebels in-place (read up about how the Colombians "rescued" Ingrid Betancourt using a network of double-agents that have infiltrated EVERY LEVEL of the rebel groups, to the point of being able to order the rebels to perform military maneuvers whenever they want) while they take out all the peace negotiators. That's classic fascism for you ...

[Ancre]

Posting to watch.

Also, here in France we're having a push for same-sex marriage, what with our president being socialist for the first time in twenty years or something. We're in the "huge pro and against manifestations" stage it seems ; it'll go in front of the Parliament in January 2013 and from there we'll see. There's a large part of the population in favor for it. I don't think we have ever been that close to legalize same-sex marriage, but I'm kinda new to politics and stuff. It's interesting.

[Sheb]

There were huge protests, and some scuffle when neo-nazis were pushed by a priest to assault pro-gay feminists with nun headgear and bare boobs. (Understood it yet?) On a side not, showing boobs do seem to be a good way to get the media to pay attention to your (counter-)protest.

But since french Presidents have an history of not paying attention and trying to look good for History, I'm pretty sure this will get through.

[Ancre]

Oh yes. That was hilarious. We had some other positively ridiculous manifestations too. I guess politics are a nice thing to watch for the comedic effect as well. Some things people say or do are so deliciously grotesque they become funny.