What in the name of god is bible study?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by onodera

YMMV, but I think a tolerable level of religiousness is going to church a couple times a year, like, to bless your cake and eggs before Easter and one more time when you're passing by, to light a candle. Just because it is some sort of a custom or a ritual.
People who go to church every week are considered dangerously religious in my book.

Didn't the Russian Orhtodox Church recently canonize Tsar Nicholas II? To me that sounds like: 1)Definitely like they're messing in politics. Come on, the man did absolutely nothing saintly. He's like Russia's version of George Bush, only on a scale that George could never comprehend. 2)Dangerously ultra-conservative, like Russia needs a new Tsar. Yeah, sure it does. It doesn't need to rekindle the idea of the head of the state being the head of the national church either.

You might reply that that was only the view of the Orthodox Church, so who cares? This week however the Russian Supreme court put in their two cents worth, by declaring Nicholas II a victim of persecution.

Seriously, are you guys working towards re-instating the Tsars and the merger of the state and the national church?

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by onodera
I still can't understand how you can study something that has existed for almost 2K years. It must've been picked apart and scrutinized by thousands of theologists (I guess you're supposed to study the spiritual content, not the discrepancies between the translations or logical fallacies and contradictions), surely there must be many derivative works like "The Bible and work ethic", "The Bible and sex", etc, how are you supposed to learn anything new and/or useful if thousands of people more prepared to do that have studied it already?

Millions have studied Shakespeare to death. Won't stop people wanting to study it.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Asher

Religious people who judge other people all the ****ing time.
Religious people who enact secular law to enforce their bigoted beliefs.

Agreed as well, of course. Atheists seem to forget though that those rules apply to them as well.

[Vesayen]

Religious people who cause no problem of any sort, make up the majority of society. (Ignored by most folks as they paint all people with the same brush)

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Originally posted by onodera

YMMV, but I think a tolerable level of religiousness is going to church a couple times a year, like, to bless your cake and eggs before Easter and one more time when you're passing by, to light a candle. Just because it is some sort of a custom or a ritual.
People who go to church every week are considered dangerously religious in my book.

Hear that, Ben Kenobi? The Emperor Fabulous is a crazy fundamentalist!

A crazy pro-choice, gay-loving, poverty-hating, Buddhism-studying, multi-cultural evolutionist whose minister is a lesbian and whose girlfriend is Jewish is "dangerously religious" because I like to see my church friends and give God a bit of my time once a week.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well you already worship a dancing cow

[Asher]

Originally posted by snoopy369


Agreed as well, of course. Atheists seem to forget though that those rules apply to them as well.

When atheists seize power and ban churches, then I'll agree with you.

Until then, **** that.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Vesayen
Religious people who cause no problem of any sort, make up the majority of society. (Ignored by most folks as they paint all people with the same brush)

Are you referring to the majority of society that does not approve of gays marrying?

[Elok]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
To heresy? The First Rome fell to the Goths. The second to the Turks and the Third to communism.

They're called second and third from the perspective of Orthodoxy. Rome split away under the Pope, leaving Constantinople to take up the role of leadership. Constantinople fell to the Turks, and Moscow took over until the Revolution wiped out the church. Now Moscow is trying to revive itself and AFAIK not doing so hot.

[Ben Kenobi]

I still can't understand how you can study something that has existed for almost 2K years.

Plato has been around for 2000 years, and people still study him. I'm not sure why age has anything to do with the interest in a topic. Antiquities is a big part of history, and new discoveries are made all the time, because we know comparatively little about ancient times then we do about modern times.

It must've been picked apart and scrutinized by thousands of theologists

Actually we know comparatively little about the bible then we do of modern works. Asking yourself the question of who wrote what and where is a challenging question for just the New Testament let alone the Old testament.

(I guess you're supposed to study the spiritual content, not the discrepancies between the translations or logical fallacies and contradictions),

What contradictions? For someone who is so uninterested in studying the bible how would you know the bible to say that there are contradictions?

surely there must be many derivative works like "The Bible and work ethic", "The Bible and sex", etc, how are you supposed to learn anything new and/or useful if thousands of people more prepared to do that have studied it already?

I'm not sure isn't that the whole point of being a scholar to understand what others have said before and to go beyond? It's no different then saying people have been studying math for 3000 years and therefore there is no more that can be known.

[Ben Kenobi]

They're called second and third from the perspective of Orthodoxy. Rome split away under the Pope, leaving Constantinople to take up the role of leadership. Constantinople fell to the Turks, and Moscow took over until the Revolution wiped out the church. Now Moscow is trying to revive itself and AFAIK not doing so hot.

Why would they date it to the schism? A much better argument is to date it from 476 when the Goths sacked Rome. Constantinople was far more wealthier and influential for the next thousand years afterwards.

By the schism Constantinople was already in a fatal decline. They don't mark the fall of Constantinople due to a withering of the faith, but rather its conquest to the infidels, and the loss of it's connection to the church.

The conquest of the Goths of Rome has much more in common with the conquest of Constantinople by the Turks then anything to do surrounding the schism.

For 4 centuries the church had been comparing itself to Rome which was considered the central pillar of the world, around which all else turned, and when Rome fell, the church had to adapt.

The interesting thing is that there hasn't been an institution which has lasted even half as long as the church. The English Monarchy is only to 1066.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Asher

Are you referring to the majority of society that does not approve of gays marrying?

That has less to do with religion and more to do with what they percieve as the "normal social order", the masses generally do not like to upset the traditional social order.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Vesayen


That has less to do with religion and more to do with what they percieve as the "normal social order", the masses generally do not like to upset the traditional social order.

You do not comprehend the influence of religion on "normal social order"?

[Jaguar]

Dude, religion is not the primary cause of anti-gay bigotry. Generic prejudice is the problem. Look at the Episcopal Church. Most of the leadership says "hey guys, maybe it would be alright to be nice to gays for a change" and half the church threatens to secede. Anti-gay sentiment isn't being handed down from on high. It's something that people just have, because people like to beat up on minorities that are different from them.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Jaguar
Dude, religion is not the primary cause of anti-gay bigotry. Generic prejudice is the problem. Look at the Episcopal Church. Most of the leadership says "hey guys, maybe it would be alright to be nice to gays for a change" and half the church threatens to secede. Anti-gay sentiment isn't being handed down from on high. It's something that people just have, because people like to beat up on minorities that are different from them.

The problem is history teaches us homosexuality was not an "evil" part of society until religion began to become prevalent in those cultures.

Religion has played a major, major role in forming the social norms and values in today's culture. Just think about it.

Which states/provinces are most religious? Now, which states/provinces are most against gay rights? It's almost a 1:1 correlation.