quote:

ORIGINAL: blnymph

would anyone of you posters over the last few pages bother to read post number one, clearly stating what all this was meant to be about?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

ours not to question God . . . and all that.

Says who? And why not? He's questioned in the Bible!

K.

I don't question God as much as I question the endless parade of people who have translated it since it was written.

Endless? Unless your are a scholar who specializes in bible translations you are unlikely to have read bibles with more than 100 translators between you and the original languages.

I don't question God as much as I question the 100 people who have translated it since it was written.

Edited for the anal among us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lickenforyou

In the United States, seven state constitutions officially include religious tests that would effectively prevent atheists from holding public office, and in some cases being a juror/witness.

That is no good, maybe the people in those states should try and change that.

Several polls have shown that about 50 percent of Americans would not vote for a well-qualified atheist for president.[/link][link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists#cite_note-50] A 2006 study found that 40% of respondents characterized atheists as a group that did "not at all agree with my vision of American society", and that 48% would not want their child to marry an atheist. In both studies, percentages of disapproval of atheists were above those for Muslims, African Americans, and homosexuals.[link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists#cite_note-51][/link]

It's called a preference. Now personally, I would rather vote for a man based on his qualifications, but if the guy down the street bases his decision on religious aspects, it's really none of my business.

quote:

If God can't be bothered with providing you with the correct translation, or the updated version, or his own book, while threatening you with eternal hell and damnation if you do stuff he doesn't like, he seems to be nothing but a mean bully, setting people up.

You would suppose that if the Bible was really important to God, because it carried in it the salvation of human kind -another thing he presumable cares about- that it wouldn't be too much effect to actually keep the thing accurate and up to date, now would it.

If the Christian God exist, he's an asshole for how selective he is at putting the correct version of his message out there.

Ishtar

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

Boi, I don't think they actually felt that way. I'm sure that at the time, they just thought that it was an indication, more to themselves than to others, of their devotion to their God.
But you know better right. You know the real reason they wear those clothes, even if they haven't figured it out yet.

And I understand that in regard to others' faith too.


But I think that coming upon others outer wear as indication of their different faith that it might have come to the Nuns' attention that what they previously thought was only personal was in fact a public pronouncement, even to those of other faith or those with not any religion at all, in any case perhaps not having much use for their public pronouncement.
Maybe they don't read as much into other peoples clothing as you do. I see muslims and catholics in this area all the time wearing different clothes that indicate their religion and I have NEVER seen it as a insult to me or anyone else.

Inherent consideration for others after they came to this awareness is what leads me to believe why we don't see that in public anymore.
Don't see what in public? I almost tripped over a nun at Krogers yesterday. That was in public.

Just a guess.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

If God can't be bothered with providing you with the correct translation, or the updated version, or his own book, while threatening you with eternal hell and damnation if you do stuff he doesn't like, he seems to be nothing but a mean bully, setting people up.

You would suppose that if the Bible was really important to God, because it carried in it the salvation of human kind -another thing he presumable cares about- that it wouldn't be too much effect to actually keep the thing accurate and up to date, now would it.

If the Christian God exist, he's an asshole for how selective he is at putting the correct version of his message out there.

Ishtar

I will let him know you don't approve, I am sure he is the only one who will care.

quote:

I personally don't care whether the text is correct or not, and I don't care if God cares, but considering that YOU do seem to care about the translation issue, you should at least logically know that the mistranslated versions are as valid as the original -if God exists...

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

I personally don't care whether the text is correct or not, and I don't care if God cares, but considering that YOU do seem to care about the translation issue, you should at least logically know that the mistranslated versions are as valid as the original -if God exists...

Gosh, thanks for clearing that up.

quote:

Voting for a well qualified candidate who happens to be an atheist is somehow supporting a 'group'? How does that work? Am I supporting the Catholic 'group' when I vote for a qualified candidate who happens to be Catholic? Should I check up on the religion or lack thereof of every candidate and cast my vote based on their religion, or lack thereof, instead of their record and position on key issues?

I think that you are still reacting to the article posted earlier, Tazzy. Either you were venting, or you really have no issue with painting everyone who identifies as an atheist with the same brush. If it is the latter, how is your position any different from that of atheists who treat all religious people like members of the WBC?

quote:

Should I check up on the religion or lack thereof of every candidate and cast my vote based on their religion, or lack thereof, instead of their record and position on key issues?

quote:

But I think that coming upon others outer wear as indication of their different faith that it might have come to the Nuns' attention that what they previously thought was only personal was in fact a public pronouncement, even to those of other faith or those with not any religion at all, in any case perhaps not having much use for their public pronouncement.


Inherent consideration for others after they came to this awareness is what leads me to believe why we don't see that in public anymore.


Just a guess.

quote:


"Nice try" at what? That I fail to notice the religion in the uniforms of the police or EM's or doctors or nurses or or the soldiers?

Or are you saying that the uniforms of professions based upon science and empirical evidence are to be thrown in to the same societal bin as theology? Yes, they all deserve 'equal air time.' Where has prayer in school gone, anyways? All 50 of them?

.......

But you now wish to equate some particular and taken as 'law' some and various specific understandings of spirituality as to equate to paramedics or nurses or doctors?

Just who is 'covering' for what, here?

And that is only a rhetorical question. Please do not lower my estimation of where society is headed by answering that one. Enough damage has already been done.


Your incessant and pointless antagonizing is not well taken here, in case that might have escaped notice.