PARABLE
LINDA'S CORNER
Releasing the Cows
(Told by Master Thich Nhat Hanh)
(Told by Master Thich Nhat Hanh)
One day the Buddha was sitting in the wood with thirty or forty monks. They had an excellent lunch and they were enjoying the company of each other. There was a farmer passing by and the farmer was very unhappy. He asked the Buddha and the monks whether they had seen his cows passing by. The Buddha said they had not seen any cows passing by.
The farmer said, "Monks, I'm so unhappy. I have twelve cows and I don't know why they all ran away. I have also a few acres of a sesame seed plantation and the insects have eaten up everything. I suffer so much I think I am going to kill myself.
The Buddha said, "My friend, we have not seen any cows passing by here. You might like to look for them in the other direction."
So the farmer thanked him and ran away, and the Buddha turned to his monks and said, "My dear friends, you are the happiest people in the world. You don't have any cows to lose. If you have too many cows to take care of, you will be very busy.
"That is why, in order to be happy, you have to learn the art of cow releasing (laughter). You release the cows one by one. In the beginning you thought that those cows were essential to your happiness, and you tried to get more and more cows. But now you realize that cows are not really conditions for your happiness; they constitute an obstacle for your happiness. That is why you are determined to release your cows."
lindainks55 said:
I like them all!
Have you noticed yet that one you've read before that didn't "speak" to you that day when reread may speak loudly? Seems we may need a different lesson today than yesterday.
I won't list them because we are all familiar with who they are. I'm talking about the bloggers OVER THERE who seem so unhappy. Do they laugh? They are quick to be critical, sarcastic, judgmental, and seldom point out anything happy or good. Maybe because they are concentrating on what seems to be their goal of pointing out their own superiority. They know best! They are always the most god-loving people so they profess. They sure don't make that god loving look very loving! They need to release some cows!
Have you noticed yet that one you've read before that didn't "speak" to you that day when reread may speak loudly? Seems we may need a different lesson today than yesterday.
I won't list them because we are all familiar with who they are. I'm talking about the bloggers OVER THERE who seem so unhappy. Do they laugh? They are quick to be critical, sarcastic, judgmental, and seldom point out anything happy or good. Maybe because they are concentrating on what seems to be their goal of pointing out their own superiority. They know best! They are always the most god-loving people so they profess. They sure don't make that god loving look very loving! They need to release some cows!
Vaughn Tolle said:
A cursory review of OVER THERE demonstrates the truth of Linda's post. My, my, what vituperation; what demonizing; what attempts at "one-upsmanship" in full view.
lindainks55 said:
OK, I'll open another tab and go to my dictionary and learn a new word...
And, I'm gonna laugh about this; not grumble!
tehe
And, I'm gonna laugh about this; not grumble!
tehe
lindainks55 said:
vi·tu·per·a·tion n. Sustained and bitter railing and condemnation: vituperative utterance
What an apt word!
What an apt word!
Vaughn Tolle said:
I suspect that deep within my cold, hard, "bean counter's" breast beats the heart of a college professor.
lindainks55 said:
I suspect you're right! But you have students here; few, but growing!
I'm going to make one more mention of OVER THERE and then promise to stop (for today...).
There is a thread a few days old about evolution. I had been following it over the weekend and went to check it this morning. The final comment is really interesting and I would recommend it be read. Talk about conspiracy theories! But, I'm inclined to believe this one. The post is by a poster named Dr. Marshall Berman and I think he knows what he's talking about.
I'm going to make one more mention of OVER THERE and then promise to stop (for today...).
There is a thread a few days old about evolution. I had been following it over the weekend and went to check it this morning. The final comment is really interesting and I would recommend it be read. Talk about conspiracy theories! But, I'm inclined to believe this one. The post is by a poster named Dr. Marshall Berman and I think he knows what he's talking about.
longhorn said:
I just love it when I dont post over there and then they say the SAME THINGS to/about others who disagree with them. And then they say the liberals dont tolerate disagreement. They only have about three things to say, and they say them no matter WHO posts WHAT!
Linda, about your comment that we need different lessons on different days....
That is exactly the same thing they say in Landmark Education. You get what you need at the time. The next time? You could take the same seminar and get something COMPLETELY different, depending on your circumstances and your relationship to those circumstances.
In fact, they say at the end of a four day seminar, that nothing has changed in your life. The circumstances and people in your life are the same the day before the seminar and the day after the seminar. What changes is only your relationship to those circumstances and people.
Linda, about your comment that we need different lessons on different days....
That is exactly the same thing they say in Landmark Education. You get what you need at the time. The next time? You could take the same seminar and get something COMPLETELY different, depending on your circumstances and your relationship to those circumstances.
In fact, they say at the end of a four day seminar, that nothing has changed in your life. The circumstances and people in your life are the same the day before the seminar and the day after the seminar. What changes is only your relationship to those circumstances and people.
Tracy Phillips said:
Okay, I can't stand it....
I confess.
I am Dr. Berman, THE ANTI-NATHAN, and a couple of other well respected 'experts' over there.
FUNNY HUH?
I confess.
I am Dr. Berman, THE ANTI-NATHAN, and a couple of other well respected 'experts' over there.
FUNNY HUH?
Vaughn Tolle said:
Dr. Berman indeed knows what he is talking about. I've been to some of the web sites he references, and he accurately posts the contents thereof. What he posts, BTW, is not a conspiracy theory, but rather factually based upon the pronouncements of the ID camp itself.
I've often thought the ability of the ID camp, and their ideological cousin Creationists, to have success in promoting these views was a stinging indictment of the level of science education in the U.S. When a college graduate such as one who worked in our office for years doesn't understand the difference between the word "theory" as used scientifically, and the word "theory" as used in the language generally, the failure to teach the "scientific method" in high school (if not before) becomes readily apparent. The journalistic community bears some responsibility as well, blaring in headlines the fact that some group has a "theory" concerning scientific phenomena, when in fact, careful analysis of the paper, etc., discloses the "theory" is no more than a hypothesis based upon a growing body of evidence. Of course, "theory" takes less room than "hypothesis"; and, J-School is a refuge for those mathematically and scientifically challenged, second only to those seeking Elementary Education majors.
I've often thought the ability of the ID camp, and their ideological cousin Creationists, to have success in promoting these views was a stinging indictment of the level of science education in the U.S. When a college graduate such as one who worked in our office for years doesn't understand the difference between the word "theory" as used scientifically, and the word "theory" as used in the language generally, the failure to teach the "scientific method" in high school (if not before) becomes readily apparent. The journalistic community bears some responsibility as well, blaring in headlines the fact that some group has a "theory" concerning scientific phenomena, when in fact, careful analysis of the paper, etc., discloses the "theory" is no more than a hypothesis based upon a growing body of evidence. Of course, "theory" takes less room than "hypothesis"; and, J-School is a refuge for those mathematically and scientifically challenged, second only to those seeking Elementary Education majors.
longhorn said:
Heh! One more thing about releasing the cows...
Some people spend their whole LIFE getting and keeping cows, believing that after they have ENOUGH cows, their REAL LIFE will start. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as "enough". There is too much, and not enough, but "enough" is a really tiny spot.
And if cows represent security? Hell, there will NEVER be enough cows. There is no real security. People can accept that or not. But if they spend their whole life looking for security, and waiting for their "real" life to start, it seems to me that they will die having never lived.
Some people spend their whole LIFE getting and keeping cows, believing that after they have ENOUGH cows, their REAL LIFE will start. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as "enough". There is too much, and not enough, but "enough" is a really tiny spot.
And if cows represent security? Hell, there will NEVER be enough cows. There is no real security. People can accept that or not. But if they spend their whole life looking for security, and waiting for their "real" life to start, it seems to me that they will die having never lived.
Vaughn Tolle said:
OK, Tracy, you got me. Dr. Berman, your post was factual, insightful, etc. (BTW, I already figured out THE ANTI-NATHAN, and was going to email you about that one!). Tracy, you are so evil, but so good at it. Note to self: Google posts with alleged faculty members (emeritus or otherwise) of universities as the author.
lindainks55 said:
I'm still laughing (releasing more cows!) about Dr. Berman!
longhorn, you and my daughter would talk and talk and then talk some more about education. I can hear her saying some of what you post. I would love to hear the two of you together! I can hear it now. You're both talking (at the same time) but both hearing what the other is saying (you are women!) and that spurs another idea so after a breath you're both off again. What fun it would be!
Hey I heard bush is pulling the National Guard from the Mexican border. Well, at least he’s withdrawing troops from somewhere.
longhorn, you and my daughter would talk and talk and then talk some more about education. I can hear her saying some of what you post. I would love to hear the two of you together! I can hear it now. You're both talking (at the same time) but both hearing what the other is saying (you are women!) and that spurs another idea so after a breath you're both off again. What fun it would be!
Hey I heard bush is pulling the National Guard from the Mexican border. Well, at least he’s withdrawing troops from somewhere.
Danny said:
LH,
I agree with what you just said in your last post at 10:55am.
Vaughn,
I agree with what you said at 10:55am also. Theory is one of those words that does seem to be misused quite often. I find it annoying at best and disgusting at worst.
Tracy,
Are you saying you are being one of the reasons I ignore the place that shall no longer be named for the most part? LOL
All,
How was your weekend? I was out and about yesterday keeping my children entertained.
I agree with what you just said in your last post at 10:55am.
Vaughn,
I agree with what you said at 10:55am also. Theory is one of those words that does seem to be misused quite often. I find it annoying at best and disgusting at worst.
Tracy,
Are you saying you are being one of the reasons I ignore the place that shall no longer be named for the most part? LOL
All,
How was your weekend? I was out and about yesterday keeping my children entertained.
longhorn said:
Yeah Linda. I'd love to meet your daughter. And you for that matter :)
Too bad talking seems to be my only skill. And further too bad that it doesnt pay the bills...
Too bad talking seems to be my only skill. And further too bad that it doesnt pay the bills...
gster said:
Remember ,Grasshopper, when releasing the cows to watch where you step, for they can release too!
longhorn said:
heheheh gster! Now, if only they would "release" exactly on my garden. I wonder if cows can be paper trained? I'd paper my garden over the winter if I thought it would work.
Danny said:
LH,
Talking isn't bad, it lets people see each others points of view. Though I do agree with you, it would be nice if talking could pay the bills.
I thought I'd let you know, I did a little bit a looking into the water issues surrounding ethanol plants(at least in their current form), and I think I would be more apt to be against them then for them. However, there appears to be some research that could dramatically reduce the water needed at the plant itself, five to ten years out if all pans out. To my limited understanding of the process, the water is used to purify the ethanol so that it can be used as a consumable by vehicles. That was extremely paraphrased and the articles I've read regarding it did go into alot more detail.
So you may have a conservative ally on your side against current ethanol plants. But I would still be for pursuit of ethanol as an alternative if less water could be used.
Gster,
To add to it, you may want to cover your nose also.
Talking isn't bad, it lets people see each others points of view. Though I do agree with you, it would be nice if talking could pay the bills.
I thought I'd let you know, I did a little bit a looking into the water issues surrounding ethanol plants(at least in their current form), and I think I would be more apt to be against them then for them. However, there appears to be some research that could dramatically reduce the water needed at the plant itself, five to ten years out if all pans out. To my limited understanding of the process, the water is used to purify the ethanol so that it can be used as a consumable by vehicles. That was extremely paraphrased and the articles I've read regarding it did go into alot more detail.
So you may have a conservative ally on your side against current ethanol plants. But I would still be for pursuit of ethanol as an alternative if less water could be used.
Gster,
To add to it, you may want to cover your nose also.
lindainks55 said:
Gardens. I am the worst, laziest gardener ever to set foot on soil.
A few years ago when I quit working (talk about releasing some cows! millions lifted off my shoulders!) I decided to take over the yard work. Wayne and I had pretty much split the responsibilities between inside and outside when we both worked. So if I did all except the work that required two strong backs he also would get to enjoy more of his time away from work. Little did I know...
First thing I decided while mowing was that I needed some flower beds so there would be less grass to mow. Mercy sake! Why didn't a thunder bolt come from the sky and hit me square between the eyes? Mowing -- whip, whip straight line with motorized tool back and forth vs. bending over to weed, etc.
Well, Wayne asked me where I wanted these flower beds and I laid out hose to indicate these are the places. He did the rototilling and after a time when we thought the grass was dead I began planting.
I'll not go into more detail but suffice it to say the grass grows BEST in the flower beds where weeds thrive too. And instead of being a faithful gardener who tackles a little at a time I wait until the plants can no longer be seen to pull the grass and weeds. I've been spending at least an hour weeding for the past few days. I'm about half way finished with one of the larger flower beds.
A few years ago when I quit working (talk about releasing some cows! millions lifted off my shoulders!) I decided to take over the yard work. Wayne and I had pretty much split the responsibilities between inside and outside when we both worked. So if I did all except the work that required two strong backs he also would get to enjoy more of his time away from work. Little did I know...
First thing I decided while mowing was that I needed some flower beds so there would be less grass to mow. Mercy sake! Why didn't a thunder bolt come from the sky and hit me square between the eyes? Mowing -- whip, whip straight line with motorized tool back and forth vs. bending over to weed, etc.
Well, Wayne asked me where I wanted these flower beds and I laid out hose to indicate these are the places. He did the rototilling and after a time when we thought the grass was dead I began planting.
I'll not go into more detail but suffice it to say the grass grows BEST in the flower beds where weeds thrive too. And instead of being a faithful gardener who tackles a little at a time I wait until the plants can no longer be seen to pull the grass and weeds. I've been spending at least an hour weeding for the past few days. I'm about half way finished with one of the larger flower beds.
Danny said:
Linda,
This reminds of something I've been thinking about doing for my parents. Work on a flower bed that follows up along the side walk. I've had some ideas about what to do, but all of them cost a bit more money than I can really spend at the moment. So maybe I'll work on something of a smaller scale eventually.
This reminds of something I've been thinking about doing for my parents. Work on a flower bed that follows up along the side walk. I've had some ideas about what to do, but all of them cost a bit more money than I can really spend at the moment. So maybe I'll work on something of a smaller scale eventually.
lindainks55 said:
Do your parents do their own yard work? Would it be easier for them to mow and edge the grass which involves using a motorized tool to remove such -- whip, whip, gone in one fell swoop OR would planting, nurturing, fertilizing plants, keeping the grass and weeds out which involves bending and pulling such separately so as not to disturb the plants you are nurturing? Get the picture!? Leave the grass! Buy them some large pots for annuals which have beautiful color all spring, summer and fall. Put the pots alongside the walk. Oh what I have learned!
Danny said:
Linda,
The reality is, I don't know that either is "easy" on them. I've mowed a couple times for dad, so really if I did it, it would be me doing the work mostly.
Though, to his credit, one of my brothers-in-law have helped my dad with the yard work also. So perhaps I work on something nice but potted plant wise to spruce up the look a little bit. Next year I'm going to help them with some house work(aka scraping and painting it).
The reality is, I don't know that either is "easy" on them. I've mowed a couple times for dad, so really if I did it, it would be me doing the work mostly.
Though, to his credit, one of my brothers-in-law have helped my dad with the yard work also. So perhaps I work on something nice but potted plant wise to spruce up the look a little bit. Next year I'm going to help them with some house work(aka scraping and painting it).
Vaughn Tolle said:
Danny, first: on the weekend, got a bit overheated here in the office Saturday and paid for it through late Saturday evening, and due to the same, took it really easy Sunday.
As to the flower bed thing; I'm the LAST person who ought to offer anything resembling advice, but I'm wondering if a small raised bed or two (thereby eliminating a lot of bending, etc.) might be appropriate. True, it doesn't eliminate the need to water (drip irrigation, anyone?), but with mulching, etc., could keep weeding down, especially if using "fresh dirt" in the raised bed(s). Just a thought, which given my lack of success in life in flower gardening (zinnias are my forte, due to their ability to survive notwithstanding my neglect, etc.) is likely worth what is being paid for it. :-)
As to the flower bed thing; I'm the LAST person who ought to offer anything resembling advice, but I'm wondering if a small raised bed or two (thereby eliminating a lot of bending, etc.) might be appropriate. True, it doesn't eliminate the need to water (drip irrigation, anyone?), but with mulching, etc., could keep weeding down, especially if using "fresh dirt" in the raised bed(s). Just a thought, which given my lack of success in life in flower gardening (zinnias are my forte, due to their ability to survive notwithstanding my neglect, etc.) is likely worth what is being paid for it. :-)
Tracy Phillips said:
****************DISCLAIMER*************
I was just having a little fun with some "conceptually challenged" commentators....HA!
Really, I'm not in the habit of doing that.
Couldn't resist.
Funny thing though, I have posted the EXACT same thing before, with my real name, and gotten completely different reactions!
Hmmmm............
I was just having a little fun with some "conceptually challenged" commentators....HA!
Really, I'm not in the habit of doing that.
Couldn't resist.
Funny thing though, I have posted the EXACT same thing before, with my real name, and gotten completely different reactions!
Hmmmm............
Tracy Phillips said:
Go back to the religion thread.
Nathan is arguing with "Paul" from Cambridge Divinity School now!
No doubt, he knows much more than "Paul".
Sneaky, huh?
Nathan is arguing with "Paul" from Cambridge Divinity School now!
No doubt, he knows much more than "Paul".
Sneaky, huh?
lindainks55 said:
I used the google -- at least there really is a Cambridge Divinity School...
The little soldier boy knows more than everyone / anyone! Just ask his Daddy! Their minds are quite small and don't hold much before they're full up.
The little soldier boy knows more than everyone / anyone! Just ask his Daddy! Their minds are quite small and don't hold much before they're full up.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Wonder what Nathan, et al., would have to say about this (apparently fairly stated) piece on General Petraeus?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/14/world/middleeast...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/14/world/middleeast...
Vaughn Tolle said:
Whoa there, gster. With Nathan's love of arguing semantics, he might think you're equating him with the Pope, which, in his stated views on theology, is somewhat worse that being equated with Satan!
gster said:
VT- That's why I used the lower case "pontification".
Great- now I'll have to get an unlisted name!!
Great- now I'll have to get an unlisted name!!
Vaughn Tolle said:
It seems that besides Paul, there are others scoring theological points on Nathan OVER THERE. I'm waiting for the "out of context" argument, "Paul", on the parable from the Gospel of Luke. I know it's coming; I just don't know how he's going to structure this one.
lindainks55 said:
Sometimes he just disappears and returns later with how busy he was -- he DOES have a life, don't ya know!? And he hasn't ignored any question. Did you ask a question? Well, he is positive he answered all the questions, you are simply not able to read! It is a strange place his mind(?). But isn't that blind loyalty the perfect soldier-type mind? It was an order and I will follow orders...
Vaughn Tolle said:
Yep, Nathan has the perfect "lifer" mindset. I've noticed by reading, talking with career military, etc., that the uniformed forces, as a general rule, are doing what they can to eliminate the lifers from the active duty service. What that means is these types end up in reserve and guard units, which, in today's military means they're back on active duty a lot as the manpower requirements of the Iraq misadventure cannot be met otherwise.
lindainks55 said:
Tracy, Do you know Long Time Poster, First Time Lurker? Do you know this person really well? Do you look this person in the mirror each day? Just wondering.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Well, Nathan's response to "Paul" wasn't the expected out of context one. It was instead the righteous indignation approach.
lindainks55 said:
Dr. Marshall sure shut down the evolution thread!
Nathan's posts have become too confusing to understand (with my feeble brain) what he is responding to, when or what he might be asking, who is on first. I'm sure he thinks he is showing everyone how smart and superior he and his understanding and faith are.
I did very much appreciate the dignity and concern Paul showed for Nathan. It was quite touching.
Nathan's posts have become too confusing to understand (with my feeble brain) what he is responding to, when or what he might be asking, who is on first. I'm sure he thinks he is showing everyone how smart and superior he and his understanding and faith are.
I did very much appreciate the dignity and concern Paul showed for Nathan. It was quite touching.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Waiting for Nathan to righteously inform Paul that the Apostle's Creed posted isn't the "correct one".
Vaughn Tolle said:
I've thought, for as long as I've been able to critically read the Bible for myself, and especially the New Testament, that there were conflicts between "the Word" as allegedly made known to Saul (Paul) and the teachings appearing in the Gospels. When I tired of various ministers' attempts to reconcile the same, I quit listening.
As I grew older, and learned a bit more about the history of the writings of the New Testament, the following hypothesis was formed by me, to which I still essentially hold. Paul's epistles predate the written Gospels. Saul (Paul) saw a vacuum in the leadership of the early Church (as it became), and being a minor governmental functionary who was a Jew, took advantage of the same to promote his personal vision of what we now call as Christianity. Why he did this, I don't know. I can speculate that he was psychologically ill, I can speculate that here was a chance to "be in charge" and pay back the Romans, etc., etc. In any event, he began his letters.
It is my thought that there were those in the early days of Christianity who became alarmed at the actions of Paul, as he was then known, and caused the Gospels to be set to writing. I've been told that the Gospel of Mark was a direct attempt to counter the influence of Paul gained through his epistles; I don't know the truth of this, but given its timing, and the difference in tone and approach from the others, there is an underlying sense to this which appeals to me.
Be all that as it may, it seems to me that there was a definite split in the early Church, and this split was addressed at the Council of Niscea (sp?). By and large, the followers of Paul "won" the debate over the contents of the Canon and thereby who was in charge of the Church, as I see it, such that much of what is now deemed Christian teaching and practice is, in reality, better termed Pauline teaching and practice.
Folks like Nathan are really Paulines, in my opinion, and not Christians. Much of what I perceive to be wrong in the organized religions directly relate back to Paul.
I post this among my "blog friends", as an example why I don't enter the theological debates OVER THERE. I promise to do my best to not impress this upon any of you again.
As I grew older, and learned a bit more about the history of the writings of the New Testament, the following hypothesis was formed by me, to which I still essentially hold. Paul's epistles predate the written Gospels. Saul (Paul) saw a vacuum in the leadership of the early Church (as it became), and being a minor governmental functionary who was a Jew, took advantage of the same to promote his personal vision of what we now call as Christianity. Why he did this, I don't know. I can speculate that he was psychologically ill, I can speculate that here was a chance to "be in charge" and pay back the Romans, etc., etc. In any event, he began his letters.
It is my thought that there were those in the early days of Christianity who became alarmed at the actions of Paul, as he was then known, and caused the Gospels to be set to writing. I've been told that the Gospel of Mark was a direct attempt to counter the influence of Paul gained through his epistles; I don't know the truth of this, but given its timing, and the difference in tone and approach from the others, there is an underlying sense to this which appeals to me.
Be all that as it may, it seems to me that there was a definite split in the early Church, and this split was addressed at the Council of Niscea (sp?). By and large, the followers of Paul "won" the debate over the contents of the Canon and thereby who was in charge of the Church, as I see it, such that much of what is now deemed Christian teaching and practice is, in reality, better termed Pauline teaching and practice.
Folks like Nathan are really Paulines, in my opinion, and not Christians. Much of what I perceive to be wrong in the organized religions directly relate back to Paul.
I post this among my "blog friends", as an example why I don't enter the theological debates OVER THERE. I promise to do my best to not impress this upon any of you again.
lindainks55 said:
A person like Nathan who has been told and believed THIS IS THE WAY, THE TRUTH, AND THE LIGHT for his entire short life and have never wondered or questioned the inconsistencies are in danger of having their head explode if they have to think about so much all at once. Someone has done a number on this young man. I suspect he has been warned of those who do the devil's work and has put everyone who questions, anyone who thinks differently into the devil's camp.
He has obviously done some study of the bible, and taken some college-level courses (history?) to boot and can still walk the straight and narrow. He isn't going to allow people on a blog whom the devil is OBVIOUSLY working through to make any difference.
How does one close one's brain so effectively? How does one make it to his age without learning how to think?
He has obviously done some study of the bible, and taken some college-level courses (history?) to boot and can still walk the straight and narrow. He isn't going to allow people on a blog whom the devil is OBVIOUSLY working through to make any difference.
How does one close one's brain so effectively? How does one make it to his age without learning how to think?
lindainks55 said:
Moving right along -- Nathan is into context now. And, of course, no one is as well informed as he.
Danny said:
Vaughn,
I find your post at 1:09pm to be interesting. I understand a little of the history of the bible, and some points you are correct about. However, when looking at the gospels also, one does see some "papal authority" there, depending on if you translate from Hebrew. If the translation is from Greek, one wouldn't see some indications of "papal authority."
To that end, while I was raised Catholic(yes, I'll admit this and I do still practice the faith), I was raised to not judge people. Every course in highschool I took regarding the faith also taught to not be judgmental toward others. So while, I have beliefs that certain things are wrong and will work to the end in making those things less prominent, I don't judge those who have done or are doing those things.
I find your post at 1:09pm to be interesting. I understand a little of the history of the bible, and some points you are correct about. However, when looking at the gospels also, one does see some "papal authority" there, depending on if you translate from Hebrew. If the translation is from Greek, one wouldn't see some indications of "papal authority."
To that end, while I was raised Catholic(yes, I'll admit this and I do still practice the faith), I was raised to not judge people. Every course in highschool I took regarding the faith also taught to not be judgmental toward others. So while, I have beliefs that certain things are wrong and will work to the end in making those things less prominent, I don't judge those who have done or are doing those things.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Danny, on the Gospels. It is my understanding the same were not written in Hebrew, rather in Aramaic as I recall. I am also of the impression that as Luke was a trained physician, his Gospel might well have been originally written in Greek. I'm not clear on the original language used by Paul in his epistles.
I'm aware of the "papal authority" issue when looking at the Greek translation from the Aramaic. I have no ready response on this. Then, of course, one gets into the Latin translation, and so on and so forth.
Truly, all should not be judgmental of others; a failing of mine I'm sure you've noticed occasionally. I guess my position on these things may be summarized as follows: each person is entitled to his/her personal beliefs. It is most incorrect for the person holding these beliefs to force them upon others who believe differently. I'll let it be with that.
I'm aware of the "papal authority" issue when looking at the Greek translation from the Aramaic. I have no ready response on this. Then, of course, one gets into the Latin translation, and so on and so forth.
Truly, all should not be judgmental of others; a failing of mine I'm sure you've noticed occasionally. I guess my position on these things may be summarized as follows: each person is entitled to his/her personal beliefs. It is most incorrect for the person holding these beliefs to force them upon others who believe differently. I'll let it be with that.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Just a quick note to those playing along; according to the Wikipedia article on the Gospels, there is some debate as to the original language in which the same were written. It seems to be a consensus that all were originally in Greek, but there's a hypothesis that the same were in Aramaic or Hebrew and then translated to Greek. In any event, the earliest writings which have been found are in Greek. I know the Wikipedia isn't the best source, but from a quick look at the source cited, it seems to have reflected same accurately.
Danny said:
Vaughn,
I'd agree with you. Aramaic may be correct. I was taught Hebrew is the original, but as you said some of the gospels may well have been Greek. I've not dug deep enough to really go searching, though I may do that at some point. ;)
I'd agree with you. Aramaic may be correct. I was taught Hebrew is the original, but as you said some of the gospels may well have been Greek. I've not dug deep enough to really go searching, though I may do that at some point. ;)
Loading....