EPTOff-Topic General Discussion - Page 4746
| Forum Index > The Shopkeeper′s Inn |
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
| ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21247 Posts
On April 11 2015 00:10 mordek wrote: Wasn't that kind of a thing in the Pathfinder series or am I misremembering? I know there was some sort of matriarchal system in that world. I mean the concept of pre-hsitoric matriarchies isn't novel, and as I mentioned, was extremely popular for a period. The theory I was thinking of was very explicit in stating that the patriarchy stems from a subconscious desire to exact revenge for ancient wrongs however, which is the lomo part. Trying to find it and failing right now D: On April 11 2015 00:13 phyvo wrote: + Show Spoiler [on the old testament and myth] + Not to mention that, aside from the firstborn plague, the rest of the plagues themselves can all be explained by things that we know today about the Nile and that period of time. From Egypt onward in Israel's history there is actually strong evidence to support the OT as history, even if you're a skeptic. Yes, there are miracles, but they are not that different from accounts from other peoples of the time that are regularly used for historical purposes. For anyone wanting to read about this in depth I would recommend "On the Reliability of the Old Testament" by K.A. Kitchen which extensively quotes primary sources to make its point. It is extremely thorough though and is not light reading. It's fairly well-accepted today that most of the Old Testament is based on history. However, as is the case with anything that's over two thousand years old, stuff gets mis-recorded/transcripted/translated etc., gets lost, fragmented, reconstituted incorrectly, etc. It's exacerbated by the role of Christianity, which essentially forced people to read the Bible as a single coherent historical narrative when that privilege isn't even accorded to non-religious texts. | ||
|
mordek
United States12705 Posts
On April 11 2015 00:20 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: I mean the concept of pre-hsitoric matriarchies isn't novel, and as I mentioned, was extremely popular for a period. The theory I was thinking of was very explicit in stating that the patriarchy is from a subconscious desire to exact revenge for ancient wrongs however, which is the lomo part. Trying to find it and failing right now D: There was some patriarchy vs matriarchy element, it's been too long to remember the details. I think it may have been the matriarchy was now more a puppet kinda thing at the time of the story or something. Best of luck in your search  @coma You left out the associated "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her". I.e. be willing to die for your wife, both literally and figuratively. A few verses later "In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself." I heard a great series on this passage/concept recently if you're interested. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
+ Show Spoiler [HS] + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/n9qqGQq.jpg) | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
On April 11 2015 00:22 mordek wrote: @coma You left out the associated "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her". I.e. be willing to die for your wife, both literally and figuratively. A few verses later "In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself." I heard a great series on this passage/concept recently if you're interested. Sure I'm always down to learn more. But I'm not saying there are no good verses in the bible, the golden rule (or silver rule for masochists) is a great, if not original, idea of course. I am saying there are bad verses in the bible. and that those verses are still actively causing people suffering within their families and societies all over the globe including in our backyards. | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
Got nothing on my golden Gaz'Rillah and golden Nesingwary. | ||
|
phyvo
United States5635 Posts
On April 11 2015 00:16 ComaDose wrote: hmm? Mordek didn't answer any of my questions just said he didn't know the answer which is fine. Or did you mean he helps you be apologetic towards the worst parts of the bible. I've read it a couple times and went to church every week till i was like 14 and enjoy reading hater and apologetic websites alike. Like this apologetic article about the rape victim thing. Their explanation is just that the father can veto it due to another verse which is equally horribly sexist. I am not looking to argue every verse that comes off wrong. only asking if one verse that is morally wrong exists. I think there are many. And I think that cheapens the book significantly especially if you try to argue it was written with divine influence. Sure it was meant for the times but apparently when shit got fucked up last time he erased the planet so we had to incest our way back to populace and with this chance to lay down ground rules instead of saying treat women with respect he said things like "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord" I just cant wrap my head around why this all powerful being that already knows the entire timeline of the universe he created would, like, compromise morally with his creation because of the times. Mordek offered to actually try to answer your questions which is more than I did. Meanwhile, the thread exploded while I was writing... I am a very slow writer when I'm not ****posting and as a result it's easily a whole new page of posts before what I write actually turns up. So my post was written just after he made the offer. I respect that you've gone to great lengths to understand my side already and come from a Bible background. Realize though that I did a similar thing and read similar things to what you read but remained in the Church. I just simply disagree with that interpretation of the verses, though, obviously, if your interpretation is correct your argument is sound. I would write more but, as I said, I personally am not in a position to do so. As a result I don't think our discussion on this can really go anywhere so I'll just leave it at that and say that I respect the work you've put into your understanding even if I vehemently disagree with it. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
also i don't get the whole it can't be symolistic part? have you considered the amount of retarded rituals and shit that people do in the name of some symbolism? anything can be a symbol if you try hard enough. | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
Does he create golden Fireballs? | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On April 11 2015 00:48 Alaric wrote: Got nothing on my golden Gaz'Rillah and golden Nesingwary. Pfft at least mine us usable! Well guess you got 3200 dust which is better ;( It does, it's awesome. | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
On April 11 2015 00:49 phyvo wrote: + Show Spoiler [Comadose] + On April 11 2015 00:16 ComaDose wrote: hmm? Mordek didn't answer any of my questions just said he didn't know the answer which is fine. Or did you mean he helps you be apologetic towards the worst parts of the bible. I've read it a couple times and went to church every week till i was like 14 and enjoy reading hater and apologetic websites alike. Like this apologetic article about the rape victim thing. Their explanation is just that the father can veto it due to another verse which is equally horribly sexist. I am not looking to argue every verse that comes off wrong. only asking if one verse that is morally wrong exists. I think there are many. And I think that cheapens the book significantly especially if you try to argue it was written with divine influence. Sure it was meant for the times but apparently when shit got fucked up last time he erased the planet so we had to incest our way back to populace and with this chance to lay down ground rules instead of saying treat women with respect he said things like "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord" I just cant wrap my head around why this all powerful being that already knows the entire timeline of the universe he created would, like, compromise morally with his creation because of the times. Mordek offered to actually try to answer your questions which is more than I did. Meanwhile, the thread exploded while I was writing... I am a very slow writer when I'm not ****posting and as a result it's easily a whole new page of posts before what I write actually turns up. So my post was written just after he made the offer. I respect that you've gone to great lengths to understand my side already and come from a Bible background. Realize though that I did a similar thing and read similar things to what you read but remained in the Church. I just simply disagree with that interpretation of the verses, though, obviously, if your interpretation is correct your argument is sound. I would write more but, as I said, I personally am not in a position to do so. As a result I don't think our discussion on this can really go anywhere so I'll just leave it at that and say that I respect the work you've put into your understanding even if I vehemently disagree with it. + Show Spoiler + the questions that got no answers:+ Show Spoiler + On April 10 2015 23:43 ComaDose wrote: No don't address each point I could go all day pointing out things like those, sorry if that came off too rude. My question pertains more toward: are there things in the bible we know to be false and/or morally wrong? If so are different authors contributions more valuable than others (do you believe every author was influenced by the holy spirit? if so if something is wrong is it all wrong?) I recall an answer being times were different back then which doesn't really lend itself to convincing people the rest of the book is still relevant today. Doesn't that insinuate God used to be immoral but he got better? This was just in response to you saying you want to understand it all but how much research can you put into things like taking the virgins from their enemies as spoils of war. How will that ever be okay? are you suggesting I'm misinterpreting every morally wrong verse in the bible? Here is an example: leaders of the church have enforced the idea that homosexuality is wrong based off the words in that book. I consider this to be incorrect. Their support of this belief has damaged peoples lives significantly and torn apart families. Which part do you think I'm misunderstanding? I have the same understanding of the scripture as the pope i just also understand that its wrong. | ||
onlywonderboy
United States23745 Posts
| ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
@Coma - The bible and the churches are different things. Churches tend to interpret the bible in whichever way benefits them the most. Homosexuals are just a good enemy for them to point their congregation at. One of the techniques pastors use in sermon is to create an enemy. Well that and constant repetition. Good propaganda technique. It's one of the reasons I stopped going to church myself. Listening to someone string a 10 minute long lecture into 45 minutes of constant repetition was just mindbogglingly annoying. It's like how in America the "Catholic" churches tend to be against contraception yet the Pope and Vatican are all for contraception they just don't view it as a reason to start fucking anything that moves. | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
On April 11 2015 01:05 Numy wrote: People are dumb that's why owb. It's even worse when one of the best decks in the game is also super cheap. @Coma - The bible and the churches are different things. Churches tend to interpret the bible in whichever way benefits them the most. Homosexuals are just a good enemy for them to point their congregation at. One of the techniques pastors use in sermon is to create an enemy. Well that and constant repetition. Good propaganda technique. It's one of the reasons I stopped going to church myself. Listening to someone string a 10 minute long lecture into 45 minutes of constant repetition was just mindbogglingly annoying. It's like how in America the "Catholic" churches tend to be against contraception yet the Pope and Vatican are all for contraception they just don't view it as a reason to start fucking anything that moves. Yeah I know they are different I was just told I was interpreting things incorrectly and I gave an example where I interpret it the same as the leaders of the religion. I wouldn't say they were all for contraception when the pope is still talking about how its an immoral solution. | ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On April 11 2015 01:05 Numy wrote: People are dumb that's why owb. It's even worse when one of the best decks in the game is also super cheap. @Coma - The bible and the churches are different things. Churches tend to interpret the bible in whichever way benefits them the most. Homosexuals are just a good enemy for them to point their congregation at. One of the techniques pastors use in sermon is to create an enemy. Well that and constant repetition. Good propaganda technique. It's one of the reasons I stopped going to church myself. Listening to someone string a 10 minute long lecture into 45 minutes of constant repetition was just mindbogglingly annoying. It's like how in America the "Catholic" churches tend to be against contraception yet the Pope and Vatican are all for contraception they just don't view it as a reason to start fucking anything that moves. Are you sure? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/16/pope-francis-contraception_n_6486686.html I mean, I know that Francis has been as progressive as to suggest that "responsible parenthood" is a good thing, but it seems he wants to still uphold the ban on contraception. That's just Francis though, I'm pretty sure the previous popes were a bit more strict. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
| ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
On April 11 2015 01:23 Numy wrote: I read about it last year. Unless he's changed his tune that's how he was. Also the vatican has been pro that even before him. naw man i think you are mistaken. the part about how they cant admit they were wrong becuase it would mean a fallible papal and they would have to admit the protestants were right with the holy spirit all along is pretty funny. they do not admit they are wrong very often. Remember how long it took them to acknowledge how our solar system is shaped? some people didnt even get that memo yet. That whole page is so frightening to read. | ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2009/march/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20090317_africa-interview.html quoting + Show Spoiler + "I would say the opposite. I think that the most efficient, most truly present player in the fight against Aids is the Catholic Church herself, with her movements and her various organizations. I think of the Sant’Egidio community that does so much, visibly and also behind the scenes, in the struggle against Aids, I think of the Camillians, and so much more besides, I think of all the Sisters who take care of the sick. I would say that this problem of Aids cannot be overcome merely with money, necessary though it is. If there is no human dimension, if Africans do not help [by responsible behaviour], the problem cannot be overcome by the distribution of prophylactics: on the contrary, they increase it. The solution must have two elements: firstly, bringing out the human dimension of sexuality, that is to say a spiritual and human renewal that would bring with it a new way of behaving towards others, and secondly, true friendship offered above all to those who are suffering, a willingness to make sacrifices and to practise self-denial, to be alongside the suffering. And so these are the factors that help and that lead to real progress: our twofold effort to renew humanity inwardly, to give spiritual and human strength for proper conduct towards our bodies and those of others, and this capacity to suffer with those who are suffering, to remain present in situations of trial. It seems to me that this is the proper response, and the Church does this, thereby offering an enormous and important contribution. We thank all who do so." Emphasis mine, it doesn't seem to be a very favourable view at condoms. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
 . Meh dumb people being dumb. What's new. It's the same with the gay marriage thing. Sure if you don't want them to be married in your Church so be it but don't try force the law to not allow them to be married lol. It's pretty sad how beneficial Christianity has been to the spread of aids in Africa :<. You'd think most of them were on aids side. I'm pretty sure they aren't against Evolution though. | ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On April 11 2015 01:29 Numy wrote: Maybe I'm just remembering incorrectly. Meh dumb people being dumb. What's new. It's the same with the gay marriage thing. Sure if you don't want them to be married in your Church so be it but don't try force the law to not allow them to be married lol. I can hear all the Danes giggling in the background | ||
| ||
