Difference between revisions of "VillageIRC religion discussions"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Started by Woozle: timestamp; format tweak) |
(→2007-01-27 21:16:05 EST: more) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
This page is for summarizing some of the more interesting discussions in the {{villirc|religion}} chatroom on VillageIRC. Specific chatters will not be identified (by nickname or real name) without their permission. | This page is for summarizing some of the more interesting discussions in the {{villirc|religion}} chatroom on VillageIRC. Specific chatters will not be identified (by nickname or real name) without their permission. | ||
==Threads== | ==Threads== | ||
| − | ===2007-01-27 21:16:05 EST=== | + | ===2007-01-27 21:16:05 EST: quoting the Bible out of context=== |
({{Woozle}} said) Here are some questions which came to me as I was watching the [[Richard Dawkins]] video: | ({{Woozle}} said) Here are some questions which came to me as I was watching the [[Richard Dawkins]] video: | ||
* If the [[Bible]] is being "quoted out of context" by those who attack religion (e.g. Dawkins), then why is there not more of a faith-based initiative (especially within the more moderate areas of Christianity) to publish a clearer, better-written version of the Bible which is harder to misunderstand? | * If the [[Bible]] is being "quoted out of context" by those who attack religion (e.g. Dawkins), then why is there not more of a faith-based initiative (especially within the more moderate areas of Christianity) to publish a clearer, better-written version of the Bible which is harder to misunderstand? | ||
* Why is there not more horror expressed by moderate Christians regarding the abuses of these "out of context" passages by those who *do* take them literally, such as those who believe adultery and homosexuality should be capital offenses? | * Why is there not more horror expressed by moderate Christians regarding the abuses of these "out of context" passages by those who *do* take them literally, such as those who believe adultery and homosexuality should be capital offenses? | ||
* Where is the list of parts of the Bible which no civilized, reasonable person would take seriously? | * Where is the list of parts of the Bible which no civilized, reasonable person would take seriously? | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Response''' was essentially "you can't just rewrite the Bible". | ||
| + | |||
| + | Woozle countered with the existence of the "Jefferson Bible"; to that I would now add the fact that there are thousands of different versions of the Bible, not to mention annotations presenting interpretations and historical background for all or part of it. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Subsequent conversation clarified some points, but did not resolve the original questions. | ||
Revision as of 12:09, 10 February 2007
Overview
This page is for summarizing some of the more interesting discussions in the irc://darkness.villageirc.net/#religion chatroom on VillageIRC. Specific chatters will not be identified (by nickname or real name) without their permission.
Threads
2007-01-27 21:16:05 EST: quoting the Bible out of context
(Woozle said) Here are some questions which came to me as I was watching the Richard Dawkins video:
- If the Bible is being "quoted out of context" by those who attack religion (e.g. Dawkins), then why is there not more of a faith-based initiative (especially within the more moderate areas of Christianity) to publish a clearer, better-written version of the Bible which is harder to misunderstand?
- Why is there not more horror expressed by moderate Christians regarding the abuses of these "out of context" passages by those who *do* take them literally, such as those who believe adultery and homosexuality should be capital offenses?
- Where is the list of parts of the Bible which no civilized, reasonable person would take seriously?
Response was essentially "you can't just rewrite the Bible".
Woozle countered with the existence of the "Jefferson Bible"; to that I would now add the fact that there are thousands of different versions of the Bible, not to mention annotations presenting interpretations and historical background for all or part of it.
Subsequent conversation clarified some points, but did not resolve the original questions.