Tiapan
Grumpy Old Man
OP seems similar to a version of the semantic debates, as the Christian /Hebrew interpretations of Mary the virgin(?).
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/1627247-post5.html
If a culture is literalist then the wording is legally binding and therefore very important. eg The Taliban, Orthodox Jews, The Brethren.
If, as in many different existing cultures, commonsense is introduced (excluded above) then the essence of the written law is used as a guide incorporating local events and circumstance, allowing appropriate flexibility in the legal process. (Mitigating Circumstances)
We all have the same goal which we would all benefit from, the harmonious society, but is it achievable.
Given most conflict today is focused around fundamental religious groups. (overwhelmingly Islamic)
What are the differences that must be resolved to allow our transition to Peace?
Burning girls schools down in the Swat Valley, does not seem, to me, to be appropriate behavior in pursuit of this goal.
And what gets me most is the DEAFENING SILENCE of all Islamic nations on these issues. Are we that different that we must deny half our human population an education?
Sorry started to let my frustration show.
Back to the OP a circular argument has deliberately no logical conculsion, the solution is ignore it. I can not read or write Sanskrit, but I was the first in the world to write the postscript version of it back in 1985. Does that count?
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/1627247-post5.html
If a culture is literalist then the wording is legally binding and therefore very important. eg The Taliban, Orthodox Jews, The Brethren.
If, as in many different existing cultures, commonsense is introduced (excluded above) then the essence of the written law is used as a guide incorporating local events and circumstance, allowing appropriate flexibility in the legal process. (Mitigating Circumstances)
We all have the same goal which we would all benefit from, the harmonious society, but is it achievable.
Given most conflict today is focused around fundamental religious groups. (overwhelmingly Islamic)
What are the differences that must be resolved to allow our transition to Peace?
Burning girls schools down in the Swat Valley, does not seem, to me, to be appropriate behavior in pursuit of this goal.
And what gets me most is the DEAFENING SILENCE of all Islamic nations on these issues. Are we that different that we must deny half our human population an education?
Sorry started to let my frustration show.
Back to the OP a circular argument has deliberately no logical conculsion, the solution is ignore it. I can not read or write Sanskrit, but I was the first in the world to write the postscript version of it back in 1985. Does that count?
Last edited: