Just to add, that in the case of Matthew- that gospel may not have originally been named for him. Origen and others refer to Matthew by the name 'Gospel of the Hebrews', as well as 'Gospel of the Ebionites, Nazarenes, etc'
These were all variants of Matthew as we today have it, and Jerome...
In your opinion. There are many happy and loving gay couples. The heartache you speak of is usually inflicted by prejudice, and people unwilling to accept gay people in any sense, or even acknowledge their dignity or personhood.
How convenient to blame the victim...
When was this period of greatness that we need to recreate?
Far as I can tell, it was the 50s or 60s, when Caucasian evangelicals were on top. That's what many of his fans seem to feel.
What economic, domestic and foreign policies were in place during this period of greatness?
I don't think...
Indeed church fathers such as Origen knew the problems with texts such as Matthew. He gave a good deal of time to the many variants of Matthew that existed in his day, as did Jerome.
I am against it only because people are still wrongly incarcerated for crimes they did not actually commit. To me, if there's the slightest chance a person might really be innocent, that person doesn't deserve the death penalty. Furthermore, if punishment is in part to make the person feel...
Your position is an opinion as well, but it isn't overstated to say that the majority of modern scholars agree with Ehrman and other critical textual professors. Even NT Wright would concede that the gospels are not reliable first hand eyewitness accounts, as conservative as he is.
The main goal of Epicureanism is maintaining the state of Ataraxia: the calm, lucid state of bliss/pleasure that the mind absorbs itself in when all obstacles to happiness have been removed. I thought I should mention that.
It seems like Epicurus isn't very discussed here, so I figured I'd open a thread where we can discuss him freely, and however we see fit.
I don't consider myself Epicurean, for the same reason I don't consider myself Buddhist, but I really like Epicurus's philosophy.
It seems like Epicurean...
I am glad I like Epicurus then. Epicurus is so little known, and he should be known more. His philosophy could really benefit people. I won't hijack this thread by going any further on that.
I think of it this way: Does the notion that letting a baby cry is healthy change that the baby might really be suffering and have a real problem? That is unperceived inflicting of harm.
And while it is true that one can dislike or disagree with something without wanting to abolish it- why...
My beliefs in a few sentences:
I believe we're all made of particles, and through this we are interconnected in a web of life. I do not call this a god. I reject god out of there being no evidence of one, and not knowing what a god might even be. I believe in living life for its own sake, in...
I mean I don't know what the term 'god' means, because I have yet to encounter a god concept that didn't seem entirely human, or based on other aspects of materialistic reality. A good analogy I often use is- if we speak of a table, we know what a table is, and what its properties and uses are...
All fair points. I get what you're saying. I suppose I just wonder if religion couldn't evolve or be shaped by society. I think in some ways the definition of religion has already had to evolve, because if we say for example that Christianity teaches blank, we can't very well say that without...
I would say that the idea of the Watchmaker came about when it wasn't too considered that things are comprised of particles, and because this is so, the world is actually the opposite of the order the naked eye perceives. Existence is actually a constantly swirling vortex of particles. I see...
Why should I fear death? While I am, death is not, and when death is I am not. Why should I fear that which cannot exist as long as I do?- Epicurus
I have never wished to please the crowd, for what I know, the crowd does not approve, and what the crowd approves I do not know- Epicurus