Woolworths SA refuses to back down from supporting Pride Month

konfab said:
The better way to view the Bible is to look at it archetypically. What are the stories in the various books, what are the characters doing in the books and what example do they set with their experiences. That type of analysis is much more useful than quoting random pieces of Torah law written 2000 years ago. If you want to understand the book as Christians do, that is probably your best shot as an atheist.

And it would be incorrect to say that every single story has 1000 different interpretations. For example, I do not really see how many interpretations of the parable of the Good Samaritan you can really get out of it.
Click to expand...

As an kid who was raised in a Christian environment full of religious bigotry and conflict, it struck me from an early age that 'we', Protestants and Roman Catholics are meant to follow the same writings., Yet there we were hating each other and fighting like cats and dogs. It never made sense. Add in the early realisation that religion is largely regional and you had a very young lad believing none of it.

so sure, I have no doubt of the good intentions of the book which was probably necessary at the time and for 100s of years after to move society forward, but I just can't accept it is relevant today. Especially when it is taken literally by so many according to their preconceived or taught prejudices.
 
Spizz said:
1. That's a bit of a weak dodge.

2.My comments are on the many, wide and varying interpretations that one sees by Christians justifying their personal beliefs and all relating to the same book.

3.Try being honest for a second and comment on the subject.
Click to expand...
1. It is warranted as you are only trolling
2. Exactly there's "christians" trying to cope and justify their personal believes or modern politics.
And there is what the Bible actually says, which is not in question and well established.
3. You too.
 
See instead of just blindly arguing, try reading what I said before replying.

DreamKing said:
if you have no idea what you are saying, why you claim what you are saying? how you have such conclusion?
you never have sex but you teach others how it is enjoyable?
Click to expand...

I know exactly what I am saying.

I have no idea what the bible says or doesn't

My comments are on the interpretations by the people who claim to follow it.

Good grief, no wonder you lot have so many issues understanding it and agreeing if you can't even grasp basic comprehension.
 
Spizz said:
As an kid who was raised in a Christian environment full of religious bigotry and conflict, it struck me from an early age that 'we', Protestants and Roman Catholics are meant to follow the same writings., Yet there we were hating each other and fighting like cats and dogs. It never made sense. Add in the early realisation that religion is largely regional and you had a very young lad believing none of it.

so sure, I have no doubt of the good intentions of the book which was probably necessary at the time and for 100s of years after to move society forward, but I just can't accept it is relevant today. Especially when it is taken literally by so many according to their preconceived or taught prejudices.
Click to expand...
I used to think like that. But that was because I was a teenager.
If there is any criticism I have for religion, it is the fact that I think it should only be taught to adults who have actually lived a little bit and actually encountered the dregs of humanity. You sort of need to see the bad before you can see the good.

And I do think it is very relevant today simply because people are still more or less the same as people who lived back in biblical days. I mean the second story in book is about jealousy and murder.

Look at Covid, in the age of "science and reason" supposedly "enlightened" individuals went against all developed protocols for disease management and went straight into mob rule causing colossal damages to the most vulnerable people in society. Look at face masks, it was very clear from the start they were ineffective, but everyone was forced to wear them like a Hijab to show compliance with group think.
 
surface said:
Dutch/English are a minority here. In private, they would probably b**ch about afrikaners and afrikaners would moan about concentration camps but it helps to be in safe space to have a anglo-boer unity.
Click to expand...
It's okay to be terrified of the superior history of all the nations you covered in your post? They dominated all over the globe while you toads watched. Lol.
 
rietrot said:
1. It is warranted as you are only trolling
Click to expand...

Ah, the same old Reitrot comment and accusation when the subject gets out of your control and your views don't make sense any more.

rietrot said:
2. Exactly there's "christians" trying to cope and justify their personal believes or modern politics.
And there is what the Bible actually says, which is not in question and well established.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there are a few points you all agree on. But good you agree that the bible is pretty ambiguous and is used by individuals to justify their prejudices.


rietrot said:
3. You too.
Click to expand...

I always am. Sorry if you don't like the questions.
 
Spizz said:
See instead of just blindly arguing, try reading what I said before replying.



I know exactly what I am saying.

I have no idea what the bible says or doesn't

My comments are on the interpretations by the people who claim to follow it.

Good grief, no wonder you lot have so many issues understanding it and agreeing if you can't even grasp basic comprehension.
Click to expand...

you don't know what is bible saying because you never read it, how possible you know what is saying of the bible and claim you know? that is my question. how that is possible if you know nothing (about bible) but you know everything (know what you are saying about bible)? can it make sense?
 
Cray said:
Did you not cover the Reformation in high school history?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformation
Click to expand...
Nope not in school.
We did cover it in Sunday school and it comes up from time to time in church. And I did go through most of the history by myself.

The Reformation does not change anything we understand about the Bible. The purpose of the Reformation was to go back to the correct understanding as previously established. So my statement that we have had the same understanding/interpretation of the Bible since 325 is correct. Some cult being creative, like the catholic church even today does not change the correct interpretation of the Bible.
 
Spizz said:
I'm sure there are a few points you all agree on. But good you agree that the bible is pretty ambiguous and is used by individuals to justify their prejudices.
Click to expand...
I never said it is ambiguous. That is false.
 
rietrot said:
Nope not in school.
We did cover it in Sunday school and it comes up from time to time in church. And I did go through most of the history by myself.

The Reformation does not change anything we understand about the Bible. The purpose of the Reformation was to go back to the correct understanding as previously established. So my statement that we have had the same understanding/interpretation of the Bible since 325 is correct. Some cult being creative, like the catholic church even today does not change the correct interpretation of the Bible.
Click to expand...
So a bunch of Christians disagreeing with the Catholic interpretation of the bible and breaking away from the biggest Christian church at the time doesn't count as a disagreement over biblical meaning? Okay then. :rolleyes:
 
rambo919 said:
Gamblers and alcoholics also want to live their lives like everyone else..... how much someone wants something does not mean it works the way he wants it.
Click to expand...

Still their choice, else gambling and drinking would be banned outright.
 
SNUFF said:
Still their choice, else gambling and drinking would be banned outright.
Click to expand...
Yes.... but that does not mean they can live free of consequences, should be allowed to receive endorsement as well as being allowed to evangelize to children.

No one is that special.
 
Cray said:
So a bunch of Christians disagreeing with the Catholic interpretation of the bible and breaking away from the biggest Christian church at the time doesn't count as a disagreement over biblical meaning? Okay then. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The catholics broke away from the official established interpretation of the Bible (which is not in question). That was the problem.

It doesn't matter how big they are. It is not a democracy.
 
konfab said:
I used to think like that. But that was because I was a teenager.
If there is any criticism I have for religion, it is the fact that I think it should only be taught to adults who have actually lived a little bit and actually encountered the dregs of humanity. You sort of need to see the bad before you can see the good.
Click to expand...

Then the question comes about which religion? How can one choose? Especially if you are in a country which is largely or even completely one religion or theocracy. Then your point, which is a fair one, kind of becomes moot.

So basically, I am that person you describe. And I choose to follow none of them having witnessed the world and it's contradictions.

konfab said:
And I do think it is very relevant today simply because people are still more or less the same as people who lived back in biblical days. I mean the second story in book is about jealousy and murder.
Click to expand...

I'll take your word for it. I understand the book and a form or unified religion was necessary and no doubt it meant well. I'd imagine at one time it saved more lives than it eventually ended up taking.

konfab said:
Look at Covid, in the age of "science and reason" supposedly "enlightened" individuals went against all developed protocols for disease management and went straight into mob rule causing colossal damages to the most vulnerable people in society. Look at face masks, it was very clear from the start they were ineffective, but everyone was forced to wear them like a Hijab to show compliance with group think.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd disagree it was group think. Masks are quite a common facial fixture in many countries by many people, especially in the east, and it was not much of a stretch to get people to wear them. Even now I see people wearing them by choice and it's not necessarily down to Covid group think but for a variety of reasons, especilally when travelling. I do think the push back against masks (and to a lesser extent the advice given during Covid about social distancing etc) is now localised to online discussions in certain countries by certain 'enlightened' individuals. The vast majority of people are getting on with it, life continues. I don't really see this discussion anywhere outside of this forum and to be fair the situation will never be repeated should another situation occur, and then I guess we'll see who was right or wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X