Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
the synthesis provided here

There was no synthesis provided there. Only examples from various religions to illustrate the concept.

what religion believes in ki?

Ki (English transliteration of Japanese) or Qi (same for Chinese) is part of a host of East Asian religions and semi-religions, above all Taoism and Confucianism.

the Bible deals with this concept on the fringe

Whether hell is fringe in any form of the Christian religion is both your personal contention and irrelevant to its validity as example for a religious  belief about how things are.

This might be something out of Valhalla

No, you again have to expand your horizon until the Far East.

but it's not in the Bible.

Where have I said Bible? Are Christian religions the only belief systems you want to consider as religion?

you've got a warped view of what (at least Judeo-Christian) religion is

Heh. I still remember the last time I gave you examples of kill-the-infidels parts in the Bible, and your final cop-out where you made me a Bible scholar being arrogant with someone less versed in the issue...

Finally, let me note that you haven't addressed the main point at all, which was about your contention regarding the applicability of the "belief" tag and the similarity of religious belief systems to non-religious worldviews.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Oct 17th, 2010 at 06:34:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Context is key. The infidels in your example were Canaanites, who were considered by God to be not only infidels - but AGAINST God's project of Israel.

Otherwise, the Bible does deal with the issue of infidels on a number of occasions and ascribes a place for them in society. God's people are expected to RESPECT infidels - not convert them at the sword.

Your two links lead to blank pages.

by Lynch on Sun Oct 17th, 2010 at 09:06:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Corrected links: examples of genocide calls and genocides, you making me a Bible expert.

The Canaanites described as being slaughtered as infidels in my examples included newborn children and livestock, and nowhere in the Bible is the crime of Canaanite babies and cows defined as being against Project Israel. Furthermore, as I pointed out when you tried this same defence last time, Deuteronomy 13 is not limited to Canaanites, nor can slavery for non-Canaanites be interpreted as "respect". You really try hard to justify these abominations by misinterpretation.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Oct 17th, 2010 at 10:07:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Me making you a bible expert... on one particular point which was the dating of a particular text - which you claimed was a fake.
by Lynch on Sun Oct 17th, 2010 at 11:24:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Plagiarised" doesn't equal "fake"... and the particular text subject to that prior discussion (of which the plagiarised passage was only a part) was the OT. Seen through your glasses, reality and even the past is is constantly shifting and changing...

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun Oct 17th, 2010 at 04:54:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, Deuteronomy 13 speaks of God calling on his people to kill. But contrary to what you said, it doesn't speak of killing infidels, but of killing those who engage in proselytizing against the lord. You'll agree, no doubt, that it's not quite the same thing.

Just one book later, however, God calls on his people to look after the infidels:

Deuteronomy 14:
At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year's produce and store it in your towns, 29 so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the aliens, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied, and so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.

The ALIENS that are to be satisfied, are of course, the infidels.

Certainly, I regard many passages in the Old Testament to be harsh and way way behind our times. From the Old Testament's teachings of "an eye for an eye" (while at the same time condemning vengeance), the New Testament has a more humane approach, teaching us to respond to an aggressor without violence by turning the other cheek.

by Lynch on Sun Oct 17th, 2010 at 12:28:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Incidentally, to bring you back to the topic, what do you think of gay marriage?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun Oct 17th, 2010 at 05:09:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Different strokes for different folks. I don't think of it. Do you?
by Lynch on Mon Oct 18th, 2010 at 02:53:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
LOL...

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Oct 18th, 2010 at 02:55:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series