What do 25% of male British travelers bring with them on business trips?

[MRT144]

What the **** is Mott's Clamato?

I should start a blog chronicling things you don't know about.

[Al B. Sure!]

I should start a blog chronicling things you don't know about.

It would have too much overlap with "Stuff White People Like" apparently.

[Riesstiu IV]

Has nothing to do with race. Pretty much every human ever, who were not an ascetics, has liked sex or alcohol.

[N35t0r]

It would have too much overlap with "Stuff White People guys Like" apparently.

FTFY

[Al B. Sure!]

Clamato, though. Not about sex and alcohol. Clamato. MRT is referring to various things I don't know about, not sex or alcohol.

[Asher]

MRT is referring to various things I don't know about, not sex or alcohol.

You certainly know nothing of either.

What's your favourite position, Alby?

Is it sitting at the computer with a bottle of jergins?

[N35t0r]

(...)things I don't know about, not sex or alcohol.

Does not compute.

[Elok]

1. Holy crap, Al has a rare talent for squeezing into the bottom of a forum dogpile in every single argument. If anybody else complained about Christians interpreting the Bible selectively, he'd get a half-dozen agreements. But Al has to pick a ludicrous, indefensible position about Wine Which Gladdens The Heart Of Man, and down he goes. Wow.

2. I have never noticed "Clamato" on any grocery shelves. However, I live in a very rural area, and it's not like I ever looked for such a thing. I refuse to eat any invertebrate as a matter of principle. If Brits like it, good for them.

3. I'm actually quite relieved that the answer to the OP's question was something as mundane as "teddy bear." The way that question was phrased, I was afraid it would be some ghastly product like "Fleshlight: The Queen Mum Edition."

[MRT144]

How can you have a caesar without clamato?

[Elok]

Communion has always been celebrated with Irn-Bru. Not wine, because that is unChristianly.

I'd just like to say that I love Irn-Bru. Pity it's so hard to find over here, and the few stores that do sell it charge an arm and a leg.

Whatever you all say, I still win... a religion like Christianity is whatever you want it to be. Either you take things literally or you admit it's whatever is most convenient for you. If you open things up to interpretation, my interpretation of Scripture is no more wrong that Imran's; no more right than Imran's, or anyone else's.

I can cite Scripture as evidence to prove whatever I want, just as Imran can. I can cite a crapload of verses which say that salvation can only be reached through acceptance of Jesus as Lord and Savior, whereas Imran (vaguely, too, I might add with no use of literalism) says Christianity is universalist.

Once you make mentions of 'context' and opening things up to interpretation, you immediately undermine the faith's ability to be both coherent and universally-applicable. Whether it's how to attain salvation or if drinking alcohol is wrong, once you get beyond literalism, you're opening things up to virtually anything and turning the religion into subjective hogwash.

Just read it literally? Do you have any idea how staggeringly naive that sounds? First off, forget about the Bible specifically; give almost any text longer than a Chinese take-out menu to three different people, tell them to "read it literally," and you're still going to get four different analyses of the text. Every individual brings his/her own experiences and unique way of thinking to the table whenever s/he reads, and there's no avoiding that.

Second, reading a book by several dozen different authors--such as the Bible--literally and expecting a single, clear, unconflicted message is hopeless. While Christians believe that all the books were at least divinely inspired, writers, like readers, bring their own points of view to the stories they tell. Which is why there are four different gospels of the one life of Jesus.

Third, literalism is rarely a rewarding technique to employ while reading any literature. You miss a lot of subtle things that way (irony, metaphor, allusions), and often the literal meaning is very plainly wrong. Taken literally, for example, the parables of Christ would come across as inane little asides that could have been profitably cut.

[Elok]

How can you have a caesar without clamato?

I've never had a caesar, unless you're referring to the salad. I'm not really a mixed-drinks kind of guy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

1. Holy crap, Al has a rare talent for squeezing into the bottom of a forum dogpile in every single argument. If anybody else complained about Christians interpreting the Bible selectively, he'd get a half-dozen agreements. But Al has to pick a ludicrous, indefensible position about Wine Which Gladdens The Heart Of Man, and down he goes. Wow.

Well, to be somewhat fair, Albert's solution for selective Bible interpretation is to interpret it MORE literally, which is something that very few people (if any on this forum) agree with.

[Al B. Sure!]

Yeah but I say that in an attempt to undermine the disease known as religiosity.

[giblets]

Yeah but I say that in an attempt to undermine the disease known as religiosity.

If religious people take the "interpret the Bible more literally" route they turn into crazy people.

[Al B. Sure!]

Yeah but reasonable people like Imran, Jon Miller, etc. stop supporting them and join the right side.