Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2010 22:49:03 GMT -5
Jesusonly wrote: Is a senior Worker "ignorant" for speaking of a "honorific" bible? What IS an "honorific" bible? Let's plumb for reductio ad absurdum Try the LOLCAT bible first... home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/LolCAT bible translation.jpg[/img] Look it up on the internet. There's plenty more like it. And how about Jesus' prayer to His Father from the Ebionics BibleBig Daddy's Rap Yo, Big Daddy upstairs, You be chillin So be yo hood You be sayin' it, I be doin' it In this ere hood and yo's Gimme some eats And cut me some slack, Blood So's I be doin' it to dem dat diss me Don' be pushin' me into no jive And keep dem crips away 'Cause you always be da man, Straight upWhat is in these "bibles" which shouldn't be there? Symbolic language of disrespect Underclass language Disrespect Carnality What is missing in these "bibles"?Respect Grace Taste Dignity Decorum Spirituality Chancellery Evocation If you want to be a Rapper, a Hip Hop man or a Gangster then you are not going to find a lot in these bibles for you, regardless of what version you go searching for. I try a new bible by reading Psalm 23. "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want..." Not many translations get this right. I have worked through many of these translations - they try to "fix" when it isn't broken. IMO. Try David's prayer with the Ebonics Bible... The Lord watches my back, He always makes sure I got enough Kool-Aid and Hot Cheetos. He gets me the Presidential Suite With the Kristal flowin'. He restores my soul, 'but I'm not a soldier'. Even though I ride through gangsta's paradise, I won't be skerred, Cuz you pimped out my caddy With bullet proof glass. You got me prime rib up in my enemy's crib. You trick me out with the phattest ice. You're like BA-BAM foine up in that glizzle. I'm up in the hizouse of the OG-Original God- My life be like "ooh-ahh, ooh ooh."My favorite bible is the New King James. It is plain English, done tastefully, thoughtfully and honors the spirit with which it was first written. Are we "ignorant" for thinking this? "Ignorant" means to ignore, or not knowing the facts. I don't think the workers are "ignorant" for preferring the Majesty of the King James bible. Quite to the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by Learning Patience on Aug 16, 2010 23:45:40 GMT -5
What is absurd is thinking that the whole world speaks English. Is the Spanish language version of the bible any less "honorable" then the KJV? Some of the friends and workers seem to forget that the KJV is simply a translation from Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and Hebrew. It is a time tested translation that is free of copyrights- so it has a lot going for it. But there is no need to demonize other great translations- such as the NIV, or the NKJV. I personally like the KJV myself. But most of my friends read the NIV, so it is helpful for me when talking to them to be familiar with the NIV as well.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Aug 16, 2010 23:56:23 GMT -5
Bert, it wasn't so much bible translation he was discussing but how we should speak to God in prayer.
Apparently God only listens to King James English.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Aug 17, 2010 2:36:27 GMT -5
Bert, it wasn't so much bible translation he was discussing but how we should speak to God in prayer. Apparently God only listens to King James English. Do you think we should speak to God as we would lets say our fellow work mates? Or should we speak to Him with language that would honour Him?
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Aug 17, 2010 3:30:17 GMT -5
Bert, it wasn't so much bible translation he was discussing but how we should speak to God in prayer. Apparently God only listens to King James English. Do you think we should speak to God as we would lets say our fellow work mates? Or should we speak to Him with language that would honor Him? So King James English honors him but todays English does not? That is the same as saying traveling on a donkey honors him but traveling in a car does not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2010 4:25:45 GMT -5
Man draws a crowd because he is riding upon a donkey. He cries out, "Hey you mother f.... get your a... over here! I am coming to you just like Jesus did! And speaking the vernacular, just like He would do!"
|
|
|
Post by JO on Aug 17, 2010 7:04:48 GMT -5
Sadly, those with a theory-based faith cannot comprehend the father/child relationship that Spirit-led people enjoy.
Romans 8:15-16 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children.
Galatians 4:4-7 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons. Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father." So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2010 7:08:36 GMT -5
Man draws a crowd because he is riding upon a donkey. He cries out, " Hey you mother f.... get your a... over here! I am coming to you just like Jesus did! And speaking the vernacular, just like He would do!" "Hey you mother filly get your ass over here!"Ah I see what you mean Bert. This wasn't Jesus. It was a cowboy pretending to be him? You are exalted!
|
|
|
Post by Learning Patience on Aug 17, 2010 8:17:50 GMT -5
Man draws a crowd because he is riding upon a donkey. He cries out, " Hey you mother f.... get your a... over here! I am coming to you just like Jesus did! And speaking the vernacular, just like He would do!" Hi Bert, you are again using subterfuge in your answer. Did anyone posting here say that they wanted to use curse words in prayer to God or show that kind of disrespect to Him? Did anyone mention that they wanted to read the LOLCat Bible or Ebonics version of the Bible. No. The original premise of your post was seemingly because you took offense at someone criticizing or questioning a worker that had advocated that the friends should use King James Version type honorifics like Thee, Thou, Thy, etc. So, to keep things in context- I will give you a more germane example. The Lord's Prayer in the King James and the Lord's Prayer in the NIV: KJV Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come . Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. NIV 'Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread. Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. ' For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins. Does the NIV version of the prayer without the honorifics really sound more disrespectful to you? Do we really want to add burdens to new converts to have to learn a new language just to be able to pray to our heavenly Father? Our prayers are unto God, not men.
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Aug 17, 2010 8:25:54 GMT -5
I'm totally lost. Here is an explanation of the term "honorific": en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HonorificCan someone explain how the KJV is honorific? (With examples?)
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Aug 17, 2010 9:04:54 GMT -5
I wouldn't be at all surprised that this Pharisee spoke VERY correctly and "honorific" and proper "words" when he prayed with himself. Good chance the publican just prayed in his "normal" language to God. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men [are], extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. One person was relating how the word "abba' had taken on a "new" meaning when he was in Israel. They were standing in a long lineup and a small boy had lost his father in the mixup and he was frantically crying in his language -" abba, abba , abba, abba"- meaning " daddy , daddy, daddy, daddy". Do you think that somehow the "abba" of this boy, would refuse to listen to the boy's" prayer" because it was said in a wrong way or sequence of words or "honorific" voice or whatever? I was asking a young boy from Papa New Guinea, last Sunday to translate some sentences into "pidgin English", and to my "ignorant" ear it sounded kinda funny, almost disrespectful??. "our father"- "bilong mipela Papa". I am sure , using a "pharisaaical " approach, we would find the "pidgin English" translation of the Bible very disrespectful. www.june29.com/hlp/lang/pidgin.html " For all those [things] hath mine hand made, and all those [things] have been, saith the LORD: but to this [man] will I look, [even] to [him that is] poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word." It is the attitude of heart towards God, not the method or position or correct order or "language", but our disposition towards Him. That will be expressed outwardly in untold many varying ways, depending on the person's culture etc. etc. etc. I am so glad that us humans can't put god in ANY box , as hard as some of us may try. Just let God be God and speak to Him , and yes, if you're a hip hop man talking kind of person, HE WILL HEAR AND UNDERSTAND YOUR LANGUAGE. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by Learning Patience on Aug 17, 2010 9:05:27 GMT -5
I'm totally lost. Here is an explanation of the term "honorific": en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HonorificCan someone explain how the KJV is honorific? (With examples?) Hi ScholarGal, I can understand why you are lost in this- the term honorific isn't being applied properly- or at least it seems that way to me. An honorific is a word like "Mr., Mrs., Dr., etc" whereas words like "Thee, Thou, Thy" were referred to by an earlier poster as being "honorifics". But in reality the words in question: "Thee, Thou, Thy" are pronouns that aren't showing "honor" or "respect" in any way- they are just simply antiquated pronouns. Thank you for pointing this out, I was just going with the original term as used by the original poster who was quoting a worker as having used the term- but the term wasn't being used properly. I notice that Bert put the word in quotes when he was referring to the word and I should have to.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 17, 2010 9:37:12 GMT -5
I'm totally lost. Here is an explanation of the term "honorific": en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HonorificCan someone explain how the KJV is honorific? (With examples?) It struck me right off the top that the worker was using a noun as an adjective. But my dictionary indicates that "honorific" could be used as an adjective as well, meaning respectful. I've never heard of "honorific language" or an "honorific Bible" though.
|
|
|
Post by Christopher J. on Aug 17, 2010 10:15:29 GMT -5
The irony of it all is that in the days of the KJV, "Thee" and "Thou" were not honorific in any way. They were the common everyday speech of one equal to another or a person of higher status speaking to a person of lower status (compare to Spanish "tú"). The honorific which was to be used in speaking to the king or other nobles was "you". People could be -- and were -- imprisoned and otherwise punished for addressing their "betters" with the common language of Thee and Thou. See Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thee"Following a process found in other Indo-European languages, thou was later used to express intimacy, familiarity, or even disrespect, while another pronoun, you, the oblique/objective form of ye, was used for formal circumstances. In the 17th century, thou fell into disuse in the standard language but persisted, sometimes in altered form, in regional dialects of England and Scotland, as well as in the language of such religious groups as the Society of Friends. In standard modern English, thou continues to be used only in formal religious contexts, in literature that seeks to reproduce archaic language, and in certain fixed phrases such as "holier than thou" and "fare thee well". For this reason, many associate the pronoun with solemnity or formality, connotations at odds with the word's history. " People who insist that there is something honorable or respectful about using archaic language in prayer may be quite sincere in their intent, but totally ignorant of the linguistic reality. That being said, I think people should pray in the language that is most comfortable and meaningful for them, but when praying in public, should take into account the level of understanding of the listeners. Some of my co-workers and I made a conscious effort to switch from "thou" (which at that time I was very comfortable with) to "you" in the early 80s when people coming to our gospel meetings began telling us that they couldn't understand us when we prayed. Now I hear the majority of workers in this part of the world using "you", and it would be very difficult for me to start using the archaic language ever again, even though at one point I had a great command of it.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Aug 17, 2010 10:43:39 GMT -5
So, to keep things in context- I will give you a more germane example. The Lord's Prayer in the King James and the Lord's Prayer in the NIV: KJV Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. A tiny FYI--we pray: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name.
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Aug 17, 2010 10:46:05 GMT -5
I wonder if the language we use affects how we understand God?
When I have attended meetings in French and Spanish, the familiar (intimate) form of you (tu) is used to address God in prayer.
When attending meetings in English, there is a mixture of thee/thou and you used to address God in prayer. Some people think that thee/thou is more formal, other people recognize that thee/thou is intimate.
When attending meetings in Japanese, the formal honorific (ten no kamisama) is used to address God in prayer.
Anyone else care to elaborate on how God gets addressed in some other languages? (German, Portuguese, Scandinavian, etc.)
Personally, I stick to "you" when I am speaking English. Having a special language to talk only to God seemed a little stuck-up and inaccessible. When I was new to speaking in meeting, I refused to pray out loud because the language used for prayers didn't feel right to me.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Aug 17, 2010 10:49:16 GMT -5
Sadly, those with a theory-based faith cannot comprehend the father/child relationship that Spirit-led people enjoy. So...your pronouncement is, in reverse, stating that only KJV users have the potential to be led by the Holy Spirit? Or is that a misunderstanding of your statement. Can you define theory-based? Would it be such as this: Adj. 1. theory-based - based in theory rather than experiment; "theory-based arguments and positions" theoretic, theoretical - concerned primarily with theories or hypotheses rather than practical considerations; "theoretical science" How do you know who is led by the Holy Spirit and who is not? How have you arrived at your conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 17, 2010 13:07:27 GMT -5
The irony of it all is that in the days of the KJV, "Thee" and "Thou" were not honorific in any way. They were the common everyday speech of one equal to another or a person of higher status speaking to a person of lower status (compare to Spanish "tú"). The honorific which was to be used in speaking to the king or other nobles was "you". People could be -- and were -- imprisoned and otherwise punished for addressing their "betters" with the common language of Thee and Thou. See Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thee"Following a process found in other Indo-European languages, thou was later used to express intimacy, familiarity, or even disrespect, while another pronoun, you, the oblique/objective form of ye, was used for formal circumstances. In the 17th century, thou fell into disuse in the standard language but persisted, sometimes in altered form, in regional dialects of England and Scotland, as well as in the language of such religious groups as the Society of Friends. In standard modern English, thou continues to be used only in formal religious contexts, in literature that seeks to reproduce archaic language, and in certain fixed phrases such as "holier than thou" and "fare thee well". For this reason, many associate the pronoun with solemnity or formality, connotations at odds with the word's history. " People who insist that there is something honorable or respectful about using archaic language in prayer may be quite sincere in their intent, but totally ignorant of the linguistic reality. That being said, I think people should pray in the language that is most comfortable and meaningful for them, but when praying in public, should take into account the level of understanding of the listeners. Some of my co-workers and I made a conscious effort to switch from "thou" (which at that time I was very comfortable with) to "you" in the early 80s when people coming to our gospel meetings began telling us that they couldn't understand us when we prayed. Now I hear the majority of workers in this part of the world using "you", and it would be very difficult for me to start using the archaic language ever again, even though at one point I had a great command of it. Dutch and German do have an intimate and formal version of each pronoun. My late mother, whose English never attained a level beyond what was required at the supermarket, used to forget that English didn't have the two forms. Every once in a while she'd cuff me for referring to her, in English, as "you". For example, I might say to her, in English, "I hope you realize that I weeded the whole garden yesterday". She would answer, "You, you? What do you mean calling your own mother, You?" I never had an answer for her before the hand came down. I hope that God is okay with it.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 17, 2010 13:12:11 GMT -5
Sadly, those with a theory-based faith cannot comprehend the father/child relationship that Spirit-led people enjoy. So...your pronouncement is, in reverse, stating that only KJV users have the potential to be led by the Holy Spirit? Or is that a misunderstanding of your statement. Can you define theory-based? Would it be such as this: Adj. 1. theory-based - based in theory rather than experiment; "theory-based arguments and positions" theoretic, theoretical - concerned primarily with theories or hypotheses rather than practical considerations; "theoretical science" How do you know who is led by the Holy Spirit and who is not? How have you arrived at your conclusion? Ever a stickler for using words in their best sense, I would prefer jo to have said, "theory-based knowledge" as distinguished from "faith-based knowledge". It seems to me those are the only kinds of knowledge that exist.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Aug 17, 2010 14:47:29 GMT -5
Sadly, those with a theory-based faith cannot comprehend the father/child relationship that Spirit-led people enjoy. So...your pronouncement is, in reverse, stating that only KJV users have the potential to be led by the Holy Spirit? Or is that a misunderstanding of your statement. Can you define theory-based? Would it be such as this: Adj. 1. theory-based - based in theory rather than experiment; "theory-based arguments and positions" theoretic, theoretical - concerned primarily with theories or hypotheses rather than practical considerations; "theoretical science" How do you know who is led by the Holy Spirit and who is not? How have you arrived at your conclusion? How do we know we are led by the Holy Spirit? Romans 8:15-16 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children. We could tell a non-related child what words to use in addressing its father, but it would be theory and meaningless in terms of their relationship.
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Aug 17, 2010 15:00:49 GMT -5
I wonder if the language we use affects how we understand God? When I have attended meetings in French and Spanish, the familiar (intimate) form of you (tu) is used to address God in prayer. When attending meetings in English, there is a mixture of thee/thou and you used to address God in prayer. Some people think that thee/thou is more formal, other people recognize that thee/thou is intimate. When attending meetings in Japanese, the formal honorific (ten no kamisama) is used to address God in prayer. Anyone else care to elaborate on how God gets addressed in some other languages? (German, Portuguese, Scandinavian, etc.)
Personally, I stick to "you" when I am speaking English. Having a special language to talk only to God seemed a little stuck-up and inaccessible. When I was new to speaking in meeting, I refused to pray out loud because the language used for prayers didn't feel right to me. Portuguese is much the same as Spanish. In meetings you use tu, the familiar (intimate) form of you is used to address God in prayer.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Aug 17, 2010 15:11:36 GMT -5
The irony of it all is that in the days of the KJV, "Thee" and "Thou" were not honorific in any way. They were the common everyday speech of one equal to another or a person of higher status speaking to a person of lower status (compare to Spanish "tú"). The honorific which was to be used in speaking to the king or other nobles was "you". People could be -- and were -- imprisoned and otherwise punished for addressing their "betters" with the common language of Thee and Thou. See Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thee"Following a process found in other Indo-European languages, thou was later used to express intimacy, familiarity, or even disrespect, while another pronoun, you, the oblique/objective form of ye, was used for formal circumstances. In the 17th century, thou fell into disuse in the standard language but persisted, sometimes in altered form, in regional dialects of England and Scotland, as well as in the language of such religious groups as the Society of Friends. In standard modern English, thou continues to be used only in formal religious contexts, in literature that seeks to reproduce archaic language, and in certain fixed phrases such as "holier than thou" and "fare thee well". For this reason, many associate the pronoun with solemnity or formality, connotations at odds with the word's history. " People who insist that there is something honorable or respectful about using archaic language in prayer may be quite sincere in their intent, but totally ignorant of the linguistic reality. That being said, I think people should pray in the language that is most comfortable and meaningful for them, but when praying in public, should take into account the level of understanding of the listeners. Some of my co-workers and I made a conscious effort to switch from "thou" (which at that time I was very comfortable with) to "you" in the early 80s when people coming to our gospel meetings began telling us that they couldn't understand us when we prayed. Now I hear the majority of workers in this part of the world using "you", and it would be very difficult for me to start using the archaic language ever again, even though at one point I had a great command of it. Thanks for pointing this out, John. I have basically understood it in this way, though I hadn't checked out the details. A bit of what I do remember from high school German is that the "informal" way of saying "you have" is du hast - which seems to me an easily-seen cognate with "thou hast" - the pronoun is similar enough, and the conjugation of the verb is exactly the same. This follows throughout German, with du and the st ending on the associated verb. English is of course an amalgamation of many languages, but is generally considered to be a Germanic language, its structure descended from an older form of German. It seems significant to me that the Biblical pronouns and the associated conjugations, which we often think of as formal, are actually informal in German.
|
|
|
Post by ronhall on Aug 17, 2010 16:54:39 GMT -5
Now that the understanding is that the use of thee and thou was actually a less honorable way of speaking at the time of King James -- is there something similar that could be done about neck ties?
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Aug 17, 2010 17:09:14 GMT -5
Now that the understanding is that the use of thee and thou was actually a less honorable way of speaking at the time of King James -- is there something similar that could be done about neck ties? I read somewhere, once upon a time, that neck ties originated as a protector for men's shirts, so as not to spill food on the shirt. Nowadays, cleaning the tie is more expensive than cleaning the shirt, and ties kind of lose their shape when dry-cleaned anyway. So, we tuck our tie in the shirt pocket or take it off when eating. Can a case be made out of this? I'm all for it, but then I live in Hawai`i, and don't wear a tie anyway ;D.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Aug 17, 2010 17:22:21 GMT -5
Can you define theory-based? Would it be such as this: Adj. 1. theory-based - based in theory rather than experiment; "theory-based arguments and positions" theoretic, theoretical - concerned primarily with theories or hypotheses rather than practical considerations; "theoretical science" How do you know who is led by the Holy Spirit and who is not? How have you arrived at your conclusion? How do we know we are led by the Holy Spirit? Romans 8:15-16 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children. We could tell a non-related child what words to use in addressing its father, but it would be theory and meaningless in terms of their relationship. Sadly, those with a theory-based faith cannot comprehend the father/child relationship that Spirit-led people enjoy. I am asking how it is that you have come to the conclusion that anyone in a theory-based religion is precluded the leading of the Holy Spirit; and by what authority you are qualified to say they are not led by the Holy Spirit. A person baptized with proper intention (to baptize), proper form (water on the head, and in the Trinitarian formula, in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit) and proper matter (water) has received the Holy Spirit. Eph 4 2Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. Again, what is a theory-based religion? By the above definition--is the 2x2 a theory-based religion or an experimental religion?
|
|
|
Post by JO on Aug 17, 2010 18:00:29 GMT -5
I realize the word "faith" means different things to different people.
Faith to me is a living love relationship with God the Father and his son Jesus Christ. Many metaphors are used in scripture to describe such a relationship e.g.
Father/child Bridegroom/bride Shepherd/sheep
Such relationships are spontaneous and no third party intermediary is required.
I suppose a theory-based religion is one that uses theory to train a person to be a child/bride/sheep in the metaphorical biblical sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2010 18:07:00 GMT -5
Many religions, monarchical offices etc employ chancellery language. Chancellery language is simply a "higher" language which reflects that office.
The form of language we employ can be evocative of our feelings.
Where words come from is irrelevant. It could be that one day even Ebonic loan words will find their way into a bible, and be considered a higher language to another culture.
People who use higher language in the presence of dignities or high office, by definition don't use that language in their private lives.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2010 18:16:18 GMT -5
I realize the word "faith" means different things to different people. Faith to me is a living love relationship with God the Father and his son Jesus Christ. Many metaphors are used in scripture to describe such a relationship e.g. Father/child Bridegroom/bride Shepherd/sheep Such relationships are spontaneous and no third party intermediary is required. I suppose a theory-based religion is one that uses theory to train a person to be a child/bride/sheep in the metaphorical biblical sense. What is happening is this, I suspect: The Grand Church fragmented in the 17th century. Everyone found their own interpretations. Then people stopped going to church. People redefined "spiritual" to mean anything, even the dew drops on the grass. People redefined religion as just believing People became "Cultural Christians" People thought churches were great for soup kitchens and homeless people. People began to hate churches because of religious wars, sexism, homophobia, child abuse and burning of books. People burn down churches and sweep away the grand traditions. Everyone does what is right in her or her own eyes. I think it was Paul who spoke of this "falling away" and John who saw people crying that there is no longer the lighted candle, the gold, the voice of the bride and bridegroom in the church.
|
|