Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Define faith?
John
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 127 (29096)
01-14-2003 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Primordial Egg
01-14-2003 5:36 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Primordial Egg:
This is a pretty baseless thing to assert, given that the Koran features all of the above + a complete code to living one's life. The best analogue to how the Koran is revered in Islamic tradion to Christianity isn't the Bible, rather its Christ himself. If its scope you're after, you should change religion.
No kidding. The Vedas, for one, are older than the Bible and vastely more inclusive. You've got all of the above plus some very sophisticed astronomy and mathematics-- stuff the west didn't discover until the Renaissance.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Primordial Egg, posted 01-14-2003 5:36 AM Primordial Egg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Primordial Egg, posted 01-14-2003 10:54 AM John has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 127 (29453)
01-18-2003 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Primordial Egg
01-14-2003 10:54 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Primordial Egg:
Indeed. I'd venture to suggest that if TB was born in Saudi Arabia or China (I was going to use India as an example, but thats too multicultural), his faith might have run along different lines. It seems that faith is a function of geography.
PE

It seems that TB dropped the issue.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Primordial Egg, posted 01-14-2003 10:54 AM Primordial Egg has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 96 of 127 (31235)
02-04-2003 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by funkmasterfreaky
02-04-2003 1:04 AM


quote:
It has more to do with the fact that God created man and woman, he created them differently, and he knows how they both work.
Funk, it kills me that you keep posting things like this while insisting that there is no implicit hierarchy. 'Fess up, man! God puts men in charge. That by default puts women in a subservient position. Two people cannot be equal if one has power over the other, whether that relationship be boss/employee, sergeant/private, soldier/conquered, or owner/slave. And this is exactly the situation you describe. No matter how much you want to wiggle out of it, you make the final call and that puts you in a position of power over your wife. There is only one reason God puts men in charge: God considers men to be more capable and valuable. The OT is terribly clear on this one. Leviticus 27:3-7 gives a peculiar price list, for example.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 02-04-2003 1:04 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by nator, posted 02-04-2003 10:42 AM John has not replied
 Message 108 by zipzip, posted 02-05-2003 9:49 PM John has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 127 (31580)
02-06-2003 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Arachnid
02-06-2003 7:17 PM


quote:
In the OT days there was a lot less sanitation and sleeping with a bleeding woman really increased your chances of getting disease.
Would you mind posting some proof of this claim?
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Arachnid, posted 02-06-2003 7:17 PM Arachnid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Arachnid, posted 02-06-2003 10:00 PM John has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 118 of 127 (31608)
02-06-2003 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Arachnid
02-06-2003 10:00 PM


quote:
Here we go again...
Yes. I asked a simple question about a specific claim. Damn me!!!!
quote:
do you really need proof that in 2000 BC sanitation wasn't up to today's standard??
I'm not disputing the sanitation part. It didn't even occur to me to edit that out. Sorry to confuse you.
quote:
I can also tell you that there wasn't indoor plumbing and refridgeration...do you need proof of THAT too? Are you expecting to find a bible passage that says "thou shalt not crap indoors"??
That's nice. But all I asked about was the claim that sex with a menstruating woman was more likely to transmit disease than sex with that same women when she is not mentruating.
quote:
Besides, providing proof of anything to you has become an act of idiocy.
So you don't have any proof then? Oh, wait, you didn't even have the question...
quote:
Just for kicks, tell me what proof you'd find as exceptable to your standards.
In this case, a study published in a reasonably respectable journal suggesting a link between disease transmission and menstruation. You made the claim, I assume you have some evidence to support it. If not, just say so.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
[This message has been edited by John, 02-06-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Arachnid, posted 02-06-2003 10:00 PM Arachnid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Arachnid, posted 02-07-2003 12:57 AM John has replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 127 (31623)
02-07-2003 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by zipzip
02-05-2003 9:49 PM


quote:
Witness Christ washing his disciples' feet (a painfully subservient posture) and death for his servants in the most shameful way imaginable (the cross). Who ranks highest in this example?
Christ did what he wanted to do. This is not the same as being required to do something. Christ didn't submit to the disciples, and they certainly didn't demand submission of him. The analogy is flawed. Women are required to be subservient.
quote:
There is just no way you can justify a subservient female gender in the Bible.
The greek word used in, say I Peter 3:1, is [/i]hypatasso[/i] means total subjection. I can find case after case.
quote:
C'mon, John. The West was founded on Judeo Christian values and it is the only place in the world in which women have anything near equal standing with men.
It is only very recently that one could honestly make this claim. This equal(ish) standing has come about only after time and reason has loosened the strangle-hold Christianity has had on the west. Even fifty years ago your statement would have been patently false.
quote:
The inherently separate but equal standing of women in the Bible led to this.
Unbelieveable....
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by zipzip, posted 02-05-2003 9:49 PM zipzip has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 122 of 127 (31633)
02-07-2003 1:34 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by Arachnid
02-07-2003 12:57 AM


quote:
I Suppose I'm asking too much to ask you to actually READ the post. We are talking about OT days... Not NOW... THEN. Do you get that part???
A virus is going to behave roughly the same, now or then. Do you get that part?
quote:
Can we agree, or must I prove to you that people used to eat food back in the olden days?
Apparently your only intent is to be an ass. You make a hell of a witness for christ, bud.
quote:
Certain diseases such as Chlamydia, Herpes are guaranteed to be passed by a menstruating woman who have these conditions wereas a non menstruating woman with these diseases may not pass them at all.
Right. There is that claim again. The one you can't, or won't, support. I've looked and while one can certainly catch diseases for a menstruating woman, I can find nothing to the effect that menstruation makes disease transmission more likely. So I ask again, where is your evidence?
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Arachnid, posted 02-07-2003 12:57 AM Arachnid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Arachnid, posted 02-07-2003 2:48 PM John has replied
 Message 126 by jdean33442, posted 02-07-2003 4:11 PM John has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 125 of 127 (31677)
02-07-2003 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Arachnid
02-07-2003 2:48 PM


quote:
You can have the last word. Im embarrassed for you. I could never make you look as foolish as you just did. If you want to help your cause, you may wish keep quiet and let the smart people plead your case.
Lets see.... You make a claim which you can't support and I look foolish? LOL..... Surely the smart thing to do would be to show your evidence and prove just how foolish I am. Of course, you'd have to have evidence for that to work.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Arachnid, posted 02-07-2003 2:48 PM Arachnid has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024