Concerns About Sony's Religious Intolerance

[slayda]

Originally Posted by NatCh

He's not dead, Slayda.

And he's hardly typical of ... well, of anything, is he now?

But is he still a millionaire after all those women got done with him?
Hey I thought he & Bill Gates were the typical millionaires but what do I know, I just an agnostical working stiff (emeritus).

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

Originally Posted by slayda

But is he still a millionaire after all those women got done with him?
Hey I thought he & Bill Gates were the typical millionaires but what do I know, I just an agnostical working stiff (emeritus).

I think that's the first time I've heard Bill Gates compared to Hugh Hefner... my mind is boggling

[mjh215]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

I think that's the first time I've heard Bill Gates compared to Hugh Hefner... my mind is boggling

Not to far fetched, both relied heavily on thousands of boobs working for them...

-MJ

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Perhaps you are unaware of the scholarly debate, which has raged for centuries regarding the reconciliation of the "ethical" nature of the decalogue in Exodus 20, and the "ritual" nature of Exodus 34.

[snip]

The "out of context" argument seems to be often employed by those who wish to avoid the glaring contradictions and problems within their holy book.

(sigh)

I'd find these points much more compelling if you had been the one providing the full texts of quotations which had been arbitrarily truncated, and restoring the contexts of quotations for the last several exchanges.

In any case, it's time for me to quit for the evening. Have a good weekend, Sonist, have a good weekend, everybody.

[lilac_jive]

Originally Posted by slayda

Hey, Hugh Hefner was a millionaire wasn't he?

LOL! She is right though. I read the Millionaire Mind and your average millionaire is a regular churchgoer and is in a happy marriage.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

It's talking about something that's flat impossible. There is no such gate. Camel and camel hair are not the same word.

Sorry, pdurrant, but I beg to differ.

The Greek word in Matthew 19:26 is "kamelon" - the accusative of "kamelos". Looking up "kamelos" in my Liddell and Scott "Intermediate Greek Lexicon" I find:

A camel; the coat of a camel; the camels in an army ("the camel brigade").

May I ask what source you are looking at?

[pdurrant]

I do not have a greek dictionary to reference. None of the on-line sources I found used that definition, but I'm happy to accept that it's used in that sense occassionally.

I do suggest that "the coat of a camel" is distinct from "a camel hair". I'd read "the coat of a camel" as being the hide, but perhaps it means more the 'fleece' of a camel, or the combings, if such is done.

Apart from whether it /could/ mean "a camel hair", I think there's another major problem with this interpretation. That is, if the writers had meant a camel hair then they would have said a camel hair, c.f. Mark 1:6

"And John was clothed with camel's hair, and with a girdle of a skin about his loiins, and he did eat locusts and wild honey;"

which uses "thrix kamelos". Now, my knowledge of greek is minimal, but it seems to me that if you were to use plain kamelos meaning "the coat of a camel", here is where you'd use it. It would be very hard to interpret as meaning that John wore a live camel, after all. But no, here "camel's hair" is used explicitly.

http://scripturetext.com/mark/1-6.htm

I'm puzzled why so many people want to read this passage other than as the plain meaning, that without the grace of God, a rich man (or any man) has as much chance of gaining heaven as a camel has of getting through the eye of a needle.

Paul

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, pdurrant, but I beg to differ.

The Greek word in Matthew 19:26 is "kamelon" - the accusative of "kamelos". Looking up "kamelos" in my Liddell and Scott "Intermediate Greek Lexicon" I find:

A camel; the coat of a camel; the camels in an army ("the camel brigade").

May I ask what source you are looking at?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I'm puzzled why so many people want to read this passage other than as the plain meaning, that without the grace of God, a rich man (or any man) has as much chance of gaining heaven as a camel has of getting through the eye of a needle.

I would have thought that was because they are not reading in "or any man" and is reading it so that it is impossible to get in if you are rich if you interpret it as a real camel. So to motivate why they do not give away all their money they have to find an explanation.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I'm puzzled why so many people want to read this passage other than as the plain meaning, that without the grace of God, a rich man (or any man) has as much chance of gaining heaven as a camel has of getting through the eye of a needle.

Paul

I'm entirely prepared to accept that interpetation, Paul; I merely offered it as a linguistic possibility. It occurred to me that perhaps the people at the time might have tried to thread needles with camel hair and know that it was extremely difficult to do, whereas for an entire camel to go through is just silly. But perhaps that's the point, after all. One might take either viewpoint.

[pdurrant]

Yes, I think the point is that a camel going through the eye of a needle is just plain silly.

At a couple of points in the Talmud, for example, a mention is made of an elephant going through the eye of a needle, as if it was a common phrase.

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm entirely prepared to accept that interpetation, Paul; I merely offered it as a linguistic possibility. It occurred to me that perhaps the people at the time might have tried to thread needles with camel hair and know that it was extremely difficult to do, whereas for an entire camel to go through is just silly. But perhaps that's the point, after all. One might take either viewpoint.

[Over]

Just in case you don't know, the "eye of the needle" is a small and narrow wall porticulus (mainly meant for people enter or exit a fortified city). Transport animals had to use the gates to pass.

I don't know if a camel could walk through that door, but it would be difficult and probably would have to be stripped from their baggage.

[linguist]

The translation of passage is a famous howler. "Kamilos" means "rope"- albeit made of camel hair. "Easier to thread a rope through the eye of a needle...." is what the original is trying to say.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by linguist

The translation of passage is a famous howler. "Kamilos" means "rope"- albeit made of camel hair.

Reference, please? My "Liddell and Scott" Greek Lexicon certainly doesn't agree with you.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It occurred to me that perhaps the people at the time might have tried to thread needles with camel hair and know that it was extremely difficult to do, ...

Pah, I reckon I could do it!

Wiry strands are easier to thread than floppy ones; even if they are a bit on the thick side.

Has anyone here any practical experience how difficult it is?

[HarryT]

I'm going on holiday to Egypt in the autumn; I'll have a go then .