Search results

My problem is when someone insists loudly and categorically that only a literal reading of some text is valid, only to then go all nuanced to accomodate a traditional interpretation which contradicts what the text actually reports. That said tradition is also responsible for a lot of prejudice...

You need to read a history book. The Romans were not squeamish at all.

If you read around a bit, you will find your question answered in multiple threads - but that would mean for you to actually engage with what we are doing here, rather than using our forums as a cheap soap-box to proclaim your views and poop on everybody else's. I repeat: You should really read...

I wasn't. You are asked to clean up your act in general, if you want to continue posting here.

Just abide by the Code of Conduct. If you don't, you can't post here.

It is very short, being the heart of the entire voluminous Perfection of Wisdom literature. Here you go: Shorter Heart Sutra

So you really are using your faith as an excuse to behave without respect or consideration of this place and your fellow participants here. Mod Hat On You will abide by our Code of Conduct from now on, or have your account banned. Mod Hat Off I'm atheist, as it says right next to my profile...

The Romans letting their hands be forced by the Jews? Not in my history book.

Sounds like an excuse to me. I mean, it is good to feel accepted and loved, but that's not an achievement to brag about to others, rather, it is a solid position from which to go and do good by one's neighbor. If someone's faith does not reflect in how they show up in real life, what good is it...

You are reading something into the text with this "by way". Sadly, this tradition of Christians blaming Jews for what the Romans did has a long and terrible history. Since you are always quick to point out when other contributors here go one step beyond the literal meaning of the text, it...

So the modern-day equivalent might be someone who quotes the Bible incessantly, while getting the message wrong? Such as, who actually executed Jesus?

Well, he was wrong, wasn't he? He was killed by the Romans. That's what it says in the text.

Your statement made no logical sense whatsoever.

Whenever I open this thread, what comes to my mind is the passage from the Heart Sutra, where Avalokitesvara admonishes Sariputra that, "form is no different from emptiness, and emptiness is no different from form". I keep wanting to say something more original, but it all boils down to this...

How can you be sure, presumably you do not know when they read the bible?

You are utterly incoherent.

Scribes and pharisees rejected Jesus' claims, but on different grounds, I assume? What about the hypocrites? Did they reject Jesus?

How do you know you're not a scribe, pharisee, or hypocrite to Jesus?

Thanks! I'll let it steep a little, see what comes up...

e.e. cummings was an amazing poet.