[Tfug] The NET

[Bowie J. Poag]

Try to include a flame-retardant suit for your readers next time. :)

Matthew Patenaude wrote:
> The Bible did not give the Catholic Church its power. The "Mother 
> Church" claims that its own edicts are above the authority of the Bible. 
> Furthermore, freedoms from the Catholic church are largely due to the 
> fact that people began ignoring the Catholics' prohibition on commoners 
> even reading the Bible for themselves. The Bible doesn't even support 
> the Catholic dogmas, and when people began to find that out for 
> themselves, the Catholic church began to loose much of its power. Only 
> in recent years have priests allowed parishioners to read the Bible, and 
> they encourage them to read versions of the Bible that Catholic 
> theologians have tried to rewrite.
> Just had to add my $0.02 :)
> Matthew Patenaude
>
> Stephen Hooper wrote:
>   
>> On 10/5/06, Judd Pickell <pickell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> I don't know, some would argue that the American Constitution has had as
>>> much of an effect on the world as the Bible. Both are very influential world
>>> wide, although for vary different reasons. The Bible gave the catholic
>>> church the power it wanted, and the Constituation gave people the freedom
>>> that they didn't/couldn't have until then. :)
>>>
>>>     
>>>       
>> You could then argue that the light-bulb has had as much effect on the
>> world as the Bible, or that toothpaste has had as much effect on the
>> world as the U.S. Constitution.
>>
>> They look like reasonable arguments as there are absolutely no good
>> measurement systems to argue them in.  It is very qualitative.
>>
>> That said, I think you missed the main point of my thought, which was
>> that the Bible being a religious document,  is not in the same genus
>> of documents as the U.S. Constitution.
>>
>> To imply that the Constitution, and the Bible are therefore somewhat
>> equivalent, and at the same time hold them up as examples of a
>> specific set of documents referred to by a previous author as "social
>> documents", while arbitrarily excluding all other documents that would
>> also serve as an example of this kind of document was  what I was
>> endeavouring to make a point about.
>>
>> As an aside, it also left quite a bad taste in my mouth as it seemed
>> to me to diminish both the Bible, and the Constitution.
>>
>> If you believe in the Bible (as being holy), then to imply that the
>> Constitution is holy would seem to me to be slightly arrogant.
>>
>> And from the opposite point of view, I like the U.S. Constitution just
>> as it is:   written by *normal  people* as something akin to a
>> governmental RFC document.  I think the U.S. is great, but we don't
>> need a  "we are descendants of  gods" mentality.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
>> Subscription Options:
>> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>>
>>   
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>
>