The Religion Discussion

[Bizzare]

i guess no one got that

[megadoc1]

^fuh real!
Throughout the ages there were Christians killing Christians over bad doctrine ,the church fathers
anathematizing from left to right over bad doctrine,catholic church burning men on the stake for reading an English translation of the bible and exposing their folly,uncle Luther trip off over bad doctrine, factions within Christianity accusing each other of bad doctrine,scholars shunning scholars for there bad scholarly when it comes to interpretation of scripture,systems develop such as hermeneutics and Exegesis to aid in proper interpretation of scripture,Eisegesis is commonly used as a slur against people who try to make the bible say what they want it to say(see d spike's accusations),
but yet Humes think the scriptures can be interpreted many ways...oh well...we didn't start the fire!

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Simple vocabulary.
Words have specific meanings.
Using terms like "I don't think you grasped the gist of what I was trying to say" and "read between the lines" cannot sugar coat the word, nor can you apply your own meaning to a word and say "Well that is what I meant". "their religion is called POOR" is what it means.

Similarly infidel means un-believer, so I don't see what is wrong with using the term.

in·fi·del   [in-fi-dl, -del]
noun

1. Religion
a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.

2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.

3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infidel

if you twist meanings around in your head, I wonder if what you are telling us about your own beliefs is actual or just what you choose to believe.

[megadoc1]

so if a man don't believe in evolution he is an infidel too? then everyone in here is an infidel in some way lol

[firstchoicett]

Like Duane have a fight going on here......interesting piece of thread thro. In my views all religions are equal cause in the end it have one God but in different forms.

[sMASH]

Duane, I think if you temporarily rename the Submit button for this ched ,we wont have to deal with AdamB hitting it up so much...lol

pot and kettle. you are free to re-read the thread.

I take it you did not get it ...Islam /submit/submit button /adam b...ah !!! forget it!!!
five posts in a row ,I say he feel it have something to do with islam

So between the Christian who adamantly believes there's only one way to interpret the Bible,

oh boy! didn't d spike's post suggests that I was interpreting the bible wrong too?
if the bible is open to interpretation as you claim, then it will be foolish for d Spike to claim that my beliefs are erroneous and it will be foolish for me to say he is interpreting wrong don't you think?
according to you we could both be correct! but carry on,it looks like we are all afraid of having our bubbles being busted! re read d spike post when yuh get chance nah. I did not respond to it because I knew it was gonna prove my point

if u did put it in quotations or sumting.... second biggest laugh i had this week..... *yes, i laugh at corney jokes*

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Like Duane have a fight going on here......interesting piece of thread thro. In my views all religions are equal cause in the end it have one God but in different forms.

not fighting - just trying to understand what is being discussed

[Humes]

according to you we could both be correct!

I've said that explicitly at least half a dozen times in this thread. And I've used that point multiple times to support my argument regarding the fallibility of holy texts and their tendency to lead people to do evil things.

Are you really now getting that after all this time?

spike can post whatever he wants. Doh try and use me to win your fight for you, like some kinda bacchanalish beh-beh. To be frank, once someone doesn't use the Bible to spread hate and ignorance, they're free to interpret it however they want.

[Humes]

but yet Humes think the scriptures can be interpreted many ways

Of course it can. All those examples you just described, as well as your own disagreement with them, prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. Interpretation, by its very definition, is subjective. And absolutely no one and no religious sect has ever followed a religious text literally. The Bible has always been interpreted, and has always been interpreted in different ways.

Some of those ways have been destructive, some have been progressive, and the terms "destructive" and "progressive" themselves can be interpreted. What I see as progressive and good for society and humanity, some fundamentalist might see as destructive for the religion and society.

You're failing to understand simple concepts in language, and you don't even have the humility to STFU and learn something. With you, it's always constant filtering and petty one-upmanship.

[chasemeifyoucan]

Just curious, is there anywhere in Hindu texts that speaks of "infidels" and/or non-believers?



If it was mentioned before I apologize, I searched.

[megadoc1]

according to you we could both be correct!

I've said that explicitly at least half a dozen times in this thread. And I've used that point multiple times to support my argument regarding the fallibility of holy texts and their tendency to lead people to do evil things.

Are you really now getting that after all this time?

that's a bad point! if I put cooking oil in my engine and destroy it or use transmission oil for brakes and kill people does that means something is wrong with the user's manual that I got from the manufacturer ?

spike can post whatever he wants. Doh try and use me to win your fight for you, like some kinda bacchanalish beh-beh. To be frank, once someone doesn't use the Bible to spread hate and ignorance, they're free to interpret it however they want.

I use you to fight for me? why hoss?..lol you way off pal!.... I use what d spik wrote to show you that you are wrong about the bible being open to interpretations anyhow one sees fit

[megadoc1]

Just curious, is there anywhere in Hindu texts that speaks of "infidels" and/or non-believers?



If it was mentioned before I apologize, I searched.

not sure but I know they deal christians dread in some parts of india



Convert or we will kill you!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/19/orissa-violence-india-christianity-hinduism

[Humes]

that's a bad point! if I put cooking oil in my engine and destroy it or use transmission oil for brakes and kill people does that means something is wrong with the user's manual that I got from the manufacturer ?

Basic comprehension skills.

An instruction manual is explicit in its instructions. It lists exactly what type of oil to use, and sometimes it even suggests specific brands. No interpretation is necessary.

The Bible says one thing here, another thing there and yet another thing elsewhere. It contradicts itself, it's less than explicit, and many of its explicit terms are long outdated. Interpretation is necessary, and once interpretation takes place you will get subjectivity and multiple interpretations.

[megadoc1]

that's a bad point! if I put cooking oil in my engine and destroy it or use transmission oil for brakes and kill people does that means something is wrong with the user's manual that I got from the manufacturer ?

Basic comprehension skills.

An instruction manual is explicit in its instructions. It lists exactly what type of oil to use, and sometimes it even suggests specific brands. No interpretation is necessary.

The Bible says one thing here, another thing there and yet another thing elsewhere. It contradicts itself, it's less than explicit, and many of its explicit terms are long outdated. Interpretation is necessary, and once interpretation takes place you will get subjectivity and multiple interpretations.

well by your own reasoning that's just your point of view but you cant say I am wrong If I say otherwise can you?... just like the manufacturer's manual for a car, Christians believe that the bible is the manufacturer's manual for us humans and is from that position I formed my argument!
weather you can understand the bible or not or what it contains is irrelevant to what is being discussed regarding how it should be interpreted

as for Basic comprehension skills,just hope no one needs to remind you that it is within a Religious Discussion thread that this convo is taking place
my point was this : if I read the bible and do the wrong things based on my erroneous understanding of it, does not make the bible faulty! OK!

[Humes]

well by your own reasoning that's just your point of view but you cant say I am wrong If I say otherwise can you?... just like the manufacturer's manual for a car, Christians believe that the bible is the manufacturer's manual for us humans and is from that position I formed my argument!
weather you can understand the bible or not or what it contains is irrelevant to what is being discussed regarding how it should be interpreted

as for Basic comprehension skills,just hope no one needs to remind you that it is within a Religious Discussion thread that this convo is taking place
my point was this : if I read the bible and do the wrong things based on my erroneous understanding of it, does not make the bible faulty! OK!

I've never said your interpretation of the Bible is wrong. I accept all your twisted, hateful and ignorant interpretations very happily as evidence of the flaws of your holy text and your belief system.

What you're wrong about is that the Bible can only be interpreted one way. It can't. It can be interpreted many different ways, that isn't up for debate. It's the values of those interpretations that's up for debate.

Comprehend?

Christians can consider the Bible their instruction manual if they want...but it's very different from an actual instruction manual for the reasons I outlined very clearly in my last post.

Here's the ironic thing, though: An instruction manual that doesn't make its instructions as simple, clear, relevant and comprehensive as possible is considered faulty.

[Humes]

Your final point is also flawed. There is no single "right" interpretation of the Bible. It's definitely possible to come up with an interpretation that is in no way supported by the Bible. However, most Christian interpretations are anywhere between moderately and comprehensively supported by selected parts of the Bible. That's the flaw. You can build a great argument for something based on certain chapters and verses...and someone can build an opposing arguments with other chapter and verses. Or one verse can mean one thing if you take it literally, or another thing if you consider the historical and cultural context.

So no interpretation of the Bible is "right". And the Bible itself precludes a single "right" interpretation.

[maj. tom]

Ezekiel 23:19-21 (New International Version)

19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. 21 So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled.




Reads like something out of The Pearl, a grand book I discovered in my youth; the reprint of a magazine published from 1879-1880.

[megadoc1]

humes this is your fallacy in a nutshell

1.the Bible is open to interpretation
2.people interpret the Bible their own way and some do evil/makes excuses contrary to what is says
3.therefore the Bible is flawed

as long as your premise is flawed, everything that follows according to your reasoning will be flawed too my friend........can you name one religious scholar who can agree with your position?

[Humes]

2.people interpret the Bible their own way and some do evil/makes excuses contrary to what is says

No, they do evil BASED on what it says. Don't try to twist my words.

If the Bible is supposed to be, as you yourself said, an instruction manual for life, but its instructions are impossible to interpret "accurately", then it's flawed.

The Bible (along with those/the one who composed it) is as obligated to convey its message clearly as its readers are to interpret it "properly". It's great as a piece of literature, but as an infallible guide to life and spirituality? It's fundamentally flawed.

I've argued my point clearly, and you've failed to contend it reasonably. Maintain the empty denials, or bring a substantial rebuttal to the table. Your choice.

[megadoc1]

humes what is evil?

[Humes]

So incredibly predictable.

[megadoc1]

humes I ask a simple question,
can you tell me what s evil?

[AdamB]

2.people interpret the Bible their own way and some do evil/makes excuses contrary to what is says

No, they do evil BASED on what it says. Don't try to twist my words.

If the Bible is supposed to be, as you yourself said, an instruction manual for life, but its instructions are impossible to interpret "accurately", then it's flawed.

The Bible (along with those/the one who composed it) is as obligated to convey its message clearly as its readers are to interpret it "properly". It's great as a piece of literature, but as an infallible guide to life and spirituality? It's fundamentally flawed.

I've argued my point clearly, and you've failed to contend it reasonably. Maintain the empty denials, or bring a substantial rebuttal to the table. Your choice.

You guys are building a strong case for following the Quran.

It is the changing of the scriptures by man "to correct it" and the loss or lack of use of the original manuscripts and language in which they were revealed that has led to this.

"Scriptures" are supposed to give guidance, informing about GOD, man and establishing GOD's legislation (laws) for man to follow.

If the Bible is flawed and cannot accurately provide this guidance, then will it provide misguidance even though its followers have good intention? Is the vast divisions of its followers evidence of this?

[Bizzare]

there are vast divisions in Islam also.

[Humes]

You guys are building a strong case for following the Quran.

Everything I've said applies to the Quran as well. Which is why I referred to holy texts in general a few posts back.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

"Scriptures" are supposed to give guidance, informing about GOD, man and establishing GOD's legislation (laws) for man to follow.

Earlier on you said "man was created for no other reason but to worship GOD alone".

Why is it then God needed to send scripture and teach man how to worship? No one needs to teach man how to breathe, eat, sleep and other natural body functions. God gave us instinct and a complex chemical and neurological system to handle that.

If the Bible is flawed and cannot accurately provide this guidance, then will it provide misguidance even though its followers have good intention? Is the vast divisions of its followers evidence of this?

but there is division and difference of opinion in every single religion!

[Humes]

humes I ask a simple question,
can you tell me what s evil?

If it's so simple, answer it. With your answer, proceed appropriately.

I've argued my point clearly, and you've failed to contend it reasonably. Maintain the empty denials, or bring a substantial rebuttal to the table. Your choice.

[AdamB]

Simple vocabulary.
Words have specific meanings.
Using terms like "I don't think you grasped the gist of what I was trying to say" and "read between the lines" cannot sugar coat the word, nor can you apply your own meaning to a word and say "Well that is what I meant". "their religion is called POOR" is what it means.

Similarly infidel means un-believer, so I don't see what is wrong with using the term.

in·fi·del   [in-fi-dl, -del]
noun

1. Religion
a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.

2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.

3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infidel

if you twist meanings around in your head, I wonder if what you are telling us about your own beliefs is actual or just what you choose to believe.

Duane,
You should know by now that I back up my statements with evidence. BTW this is no fight as suggested.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infidel

Excerpt:
Islamic

Infidel is an English language word commonly used to translate the equivalent Arabic language word for non-Muslims; kafir, literally the one who "covers", is usually translated as "disbeliever"; i.e. in English translations of the Quranic verse, 109:1,[16][17][18] In the Islamic doctrinal sense, the term only refers to a person who does not recognize the one God (Allah) such as atheists and polytheists. However, since Islam considers Jews and Christians as fellow believers they are called "People of the Book (Ahl al-kitab)" instead.[19][20][21]

Kafir, like infidel, has also come to be regarded as offensive,[22] thus some Muslim scholars discourage its use due to the Quran's command to use kind words.[23][22] It is even a punishable offense to use this term against a Jew or a Christian, under Islamic law.[22] Some contemporary Muslim extremists, however, have applied the term to all non-Muslims.[19]

[megadoc1]

humes I ask a simple question,
can you tell me what s evil?

If it's so simple, answer it. With your answer, proceed appropriately.

I've argued my point clearly, and you've failed to contend it reasonably. Maintain the empty denials, or bring a substantial rebuttal to the table. Your choice.

humes all I need to know is what do you consider evil
we really need to define this before we can go any further.

[Humes]

We can go further, man. You define it. If we disagree, we move accordingly.