Comments by "Ungoogleable o_O" (@oO_ox_O) on "How I'm Working for Change Inside My Church | Chelsea Shields | TED Talks" video.

+Mia Hansen Stop spamming.
2
Mia Hansen A comment that had nothing to do with this thread.
2
+LilyLaya Maybe people came to this video interested in the arguments the person in the video might present and apparently weren't swayed.
1
***** > If you believe that G-d created a bunch of rules for you to live by, and someone comes in and breaks down all those rules.. She does not believe that the deity intended the rules as-is. Religions like Islam are here to stay, why not reform them? > That's why if you go to all the left-wing churches in America, they are all empty. I don't think that's true. > A church that doesn't believe in a concrete unchangeable right and wrong, is a church that doesn't have a purpose for existing. In the end it's always up for interpretation and what interpretation is currently popular changes all the time. > then why believe in anything? If you by "believe" you mean blind faith in an ideology then I agree. There is no good reason for this type of "belief".
1
***** > [sky diving and egan society examples] Sure, there are certain defining factors that aren't up for interpretations, e.g. there being a Christ figure in Christianity. > Similarly, you don't get to just 'interpret" whatever the heck you want our religion to be, and try and change it. Heh. Does the Bible (esp. the OT) condone slavery? You see, that's an example of something where you have to bend the texts a to mean something else or simply declare those parts to be not valid any more (which would still mean that it was valid and moral at some time). There are numerous other similar examples.
1
***** > The Bible does condone slavery. That's your interpretation, to me Exodus 21 and Leviticus 19 and 25 are pretty clear in their support of slavery (not even mentioning the numerous stories involving virgin war brides). Inb4, the NT also does a bad job at being clearly against it, Slaves are instructed to be obedient to their masters and there is the parable of the faithful servant… > You work at a job? I talk about owning people. I am sure you don't equate these things when you had a choice between being a slave and working a job… > Or why would it say in the 7th year they could go freely, without paying anything? That's not true for all slaves. You do realize a lot of distinctions are made, e.g. whether someone is an Israelite or not? Whether he married and got children while enslaved? Whether bought from another nation or not? And don't even get me started on gender… I hope you are just being ignorant and not disingenuous. BTW, don't get me wrong, I am happy that you are following a reformist interpretation. Reformism is important, in Islam, just like in Judaism, Christianity and Mormonism. And latter has the nifty benefit that their "pope" can't just update the official interpretation but also the articles of faith themselves, now blacks can enter their holy sites as well! So once reformists like her become quite popular their pope will get suddenly get a holy inspiration.
1
***** > You didn't read what I said, did you? :D I said, the Bible DOES condone slavery. The Bible is not 'clearly against it'. Oops, mea culpa, I stand corrected. You are first person admitting that it does, somehow I wasn't expecting this, heh. > And I still support the Bible. :) That was the law of Israel. Ugh. What an immoral law, only an evil god could come up with such laws. BTW, I don't see those rules being literally abrogated, so I guess they are still in place to you.
1
***** > It was not until New Testament Christians, reading Galations 3:28 and many similar verses, where based on G-d, we determined that we should not have slaves. I would argue it was the other way around. Frst came the notion that all men should be equal and then the humanist interpretations. > no one ever thought of slavery as immoral Zoroastrianism. > and left-wing radicals February 4th, 1794. BTW, I hope you don't think that slavery was ever moral.
1