Circa

Oh that's really sad! I was having a conversation about something that was niggling me at work. It's been years since I've been on the forum but I remembered HH and thought he would have the answer to this question. So I looked him up

Absolutely love the place - haven't been for years though. I used to go on retreat alone there - a bit of a God focussed time. If you like a wild windswept but intimate environment it's worth a visit

I gather this is causing you a problem, but not entirely sure why. Stop replying and I'll go away, if that's the desired outcome.

Thank you.

All quite fascinating, as usual.

Must add that our firewalls have just kicked in, so can't get on to the last page of this thread. Not ignoring any replies.

Possibly - but I think we can be a bit more complicated that that. I don't think it's always as cut and dried as being born gay or straight, or then having sex with a few people before you get married to ensure you make an informed decision. Just not convinced sex before marriage is the safety net some make it out to be.

What you say sounds sensible but I know too many people who have decided they are gay years into a heterosexual marriage (after not being abstinent before marriage), to think that having sex before marriage prevents all problems of sexual incompatability after marriage. It may help some but it sure isn't necessary for all.

That was a brilliant article. I'm a Christian, but I can't say it would phase me at all if someone decided to burn a bible. You can't burn truth, or whatever it is that makes the meaning of the words in the book important.

Hi PT. I just had another, more productive, ferret around the web, and looks like the source may be a poem by Muslihuddin Sadi - 13th Century Persian Poet "If, of thy mortal goods, thou art bereft, And from thy slender store two loaves alone to thee are left, Sell one & from the dole, Buy Hyacinths to feed the soul"

Actually - I still need to know where to reference this. Where is the quote found?

Ah, thanks mate. That may just be it.

'Bread feeds the body indeed, but flowers feed the soul' Is there a Muslim/knower of the texts out there who can tell me where this quote is to be found in the Qur'an/Hadiths? I've seen it quoted a few times but cannot find it in the book.

Cool. I was just thinking - after reading your post about how possible it is really for church to modernise. I had to conclude that in some ways it wouldn't be possible. As I understand it - church means a people called out. So if you are called out to do things differently, you're always likely to be different, so might never manage to modernise completely. Not sure if that is actually any clearer though..

If you let me know what you need expanding - I'll have a go. If you are wanting to link my post with this artical in some way- I'll need you to expand your thoughts first. If it has made your blood boil, and somehow you've linked it to what I've said I'd like that clearing up first in case you are planning to use me as a sounding board for your rage!

I don't think church can truely modernise. We might speak the language of the day, and be culturally similar, but I think the very meaning of the word (called out, seperate) will always mean we'll be different.

Lovely name that.

They must've knew you had it in you. I could never hold it together to do something like that. I was going to post a poem I wrote about my Mum dying - but it's just too sad! And it was 12 yeast ago (on Saturday).

You've got some guts Redrobbo - hope all goes well.

at present i'm being protected by dans guardian - so can't get beyond this page. just in case anyone replied to me i aint ignoring ya

In that chapter, some Jews were accusing Jesus of blasphemy - and Jesus responded by using the Jewish law and scripture to exonerate himself. They were both referring to the scrpture, but Jesus wins. He was beginning to change things. Don't underestimate the relevance of the last part of the sentence - Jesus coming to fulfill the law and the prophets was a (spiritual) paradigm shift, which began in his earthly lifetime. What about the (sexually immoral) woman caught in the act of adultery? Jesus ought to have said that she should be stoned, according to the law, when asked to pass judgement. But he shifted the emphasis - not saying "drop the stones guys, these were two consenting adults" but putting the severity of her sin in context with that of her accusers. So it didn't remove her culpability, but exposed theirs. I don't discount the word of God - but I try to take Jesus' lead. Adultary, sex outside of marriage and practicing homosexuality are just 3 example of sexual immorality - all condemned, not one more than the other, but all to be avoided. It's not for me to condem anyone - but to aim to love and keep my own side of the street in order. I'm not sure it applies to as many as you say - all of western christianity is a big chunk, and i wonder if you have taken a close enough look at non-western christianity? I think part of the problem is how to define real and lite Christianity. If real christianity is just following the letter of the law, then Jesus IS Christianitylite. Is a characteristic of real Christianity "having a problem with homosexuals"? Is not isolating a particular sin and elivating it's importance above others, "abandoning part of (ones) religion"? While I love the expression - I'd question your definition, because I think Jesus fits the bill a bit too well.

So, was Jesus the founder of Christianitylite? Where was Jesus explicit in his condemnation of homosexuals? He never singled them out - the most he did was to refer to sexual immorality - that's hetero or homosexual. Many Western Christians would go along with the fact that this covers anything outside of marriage between a male and female. And did he single sexual sin out as more evil than any other? I think he listed it alongside evil thoughts, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. I don't have any personal wealth - or property or posessions (apart from clothes, toothbrush and a few bits and bobs anyone can borrow), many Christians have less.But where is Jesus' hard and fast rule about this? He told the Rich young ruler that to be perfect - he needed to sell all he had and give it to the poor, but he didn't say that to all his followers. Giving to the poor is a theme that runs through the gospels, but there is no one rule for all.

Made me smile, but not sure about your Christianitylite. Throws up a whole load of questions. I'm a full-fat Christian, but it doesn't mean I expect anyone born into Christianity to marry a Christian. Becoming a Christian involves you making a decision. Becoming part of any church is another decision - if I had a child - they would not be born Christian or a member of my church.

I think Paxman and Nawaz realised they were holding dialogue with the deaf . It's a last ditch fundamentalist tactic - keep talking and ignoring everything being said. I've talked to Christians like it - and I've talked to Muslims like it (not to mention athiests, skeptics...). It's pointless trying to stop them talking, because you end up using the same tactics to get yourself heard.

I agree, but once someone like Choudary and his motor mouth get going, it's hard to moderate - he just has to keep talking to avoid giving answers that would sink him. Probably best that Paxman let him foam at the mouth cos he just looked plain stupid.