|
Post by blandie on Dec 1, 2015 13:37:28 GMT -5
No not 2 different stories and not even stories with 'clear cut' differences. If one person calls a person's hair as blonde and a second person describes it as flaxen doesn't mean they are describing something different. Gall is not a known plant but any bitter tasting substance and mixed with gall and mixed with myrrh are not mutually exclusive any more than not noting gall and/or myrrh creates a different story. Wine and vinegar are also not necessarily mutually exclusive terms despite you insisting that they are. Words can and frequently do carry wider meanings and are seldom as narrowly defined as would be convenient for argument sake - and its misleading to dismiss consistent alternate meanings of terms when multiple sources describe the same event. Vinegar and wine can be the same thing even in english - and I think most are aware that the 'vin' in english means wine and the egar/eager to sharp/sour from our schooldays french or latin or shakespeare. Jumping to a conclusion based upon misconstruction of terms and limiting the language to an artificially narrow meaning that supports a preordained conclusion is worthy of ole wm i's and other workers setting up straw men to attack - like the pretenses of not being ordained ministers and not an organization and no rules and don't take money and on and on all predicated on disingenuous too-narrow definitions that are valid to no one other than someone arguing from the 2x2-ism mindset who is willing to ignore the inconsistencies raised by limiting the actual meanings to such fine granularity that they become ridiculous jargon - rhetorical trickery thats also common enough in politics and science and other fields too in distracting from alternatives when pushing a narrow conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 1, 2015 15:22:25 GMT -5
No not 2 different stories and not even stories with 'clear cut' differences. If one person calls a person's hair as blonde and a second person describes it as flaxen doesn't mean they are describing something different. No it doesn't but what a listener would hear is different.In this case it does possibly make a difference. Myrrh is known to relieve pain. There is nothing sure regarding gall. One might imply that the Romans were showing mercy.I am not saying that they are different. I stated that the story was different depending on the writer and the translator.I am not saying anything other than the fact that the stories are presented in different ways.I am well aware of the etymology of these words. But when you read "wine" and then you read "vinegar" there are two different meanings. Vinegar and wine do not mean the same thing in English, regardless of their roots. If I offered you a glass of vinegar with dinner your reaction would be different than if I offered you wine.This has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with the fact that the translations of the bible differ. The same Greek text is translated into different words by different translators. Different writers arrive at different conclusions. You said: "...limiting the language to an artificially narrow meaning that supports a preordained conclusion..."What about: "...limiting expanding the language to an artificially narrow wide meaning that supports a preordained conclusion..."
Is there a difference?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Dec 2, 2015 13:15:26 GMT -5
Sometimes. And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered thereof wild gourds his lap full, and came and shred them into the pot of pottage: for they knew them not.I can't imagine anyone wanting to use gourd juice as a substitute for communion wine. But it could have been pumpkins. Pumpkin soup,yum, followed by a nice Pinot Gris or Pinot Noir or maybe for the older ones, a Pinot More.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 2, 2015 13:51:37 GMT -5
I can't imagine anyone wanting to use gourd juice as a substitute for communion wine. But it could have been pumpkins. Pumpkin soup,yum, followed by a nice Pinot Gris or Pinot Noir or maybe for the older ones, a Pinot More. More likely Citrullus colocynthis. I am guessing the guests did not care for the peristaltic rush!
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 2, 2015 14:23:05 GMT -5
That nice. You can get some real nice Ports. Problem with grapejuice is it just seems so cheap. But I guess its just a symbol so it shouldn't matter that much. It would just be nice to put out your best wine or port for such a special occasion. i think it cheapens the symbol From my limited exposure to Europe and being in meetings there etc., i would say that is the logic they use and for good reason. Put out the BEST wine for the BEST remembrance, not" cheap" welch grape juice like us uncivilized north americans use. I am sure mr. Welch would prefer grape juice being used though. Of course , being a symbol for remembrance One could use coke and hamburger, with the same respevt and revetence for who and what is being remembrred. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Dec 2, 2015 14:30:53 GMT -5
i think it cheapens the symbol From my limited exposure to Europe and being in meetings there etc., i would say that is the logic they use and for good reason. Put out the BEST wine for the BEST remembrance, not" cheap" welch grape juice like us uncivilized north americans use. I am sure mr. Welch would prefer grape juice being used though. Of course , being a symbol for remembrance One could use coke and hamburger, with the same respevt and revetence for who and what is being remembrred. Alvin Welch's 100% Grape Juice is made using Concord grapes and could be viewed as a non-alcoholic substitute for a popular traditional Kosher wine made by Manischewitz using Concord grapes. Speaking of which, there is this in recent news: Manischewitz and Welch's Team Up
|
|