in reply to Re: Religion in the Monastery.
in thread Religion in the Monastery.

while($bored_at_work) { bump(Old::Thread); }

While I don't disagree with advertising faith in any fashion. I can make a statement that I think anyone on either side of the discussion can agree with. Radicals and/or Fanatics about anything are bad. While the term "all things in moderation" is in the bible ( and i'm sure other places).. I don't think its completely "un-christian" of me to say that its a good idea not to consume yourself with any one thing.. be it work,sports, or church.

The moment you stop listening to new ideas is the moment you stop growing. Plugging your ears to new ideas doesn't make you any smarter and it doesn't make your beliefs more valid. Also, I find that the best way to reassure what I believe, is to discuss it with others and hear their thoughts. Variety is the spice of life, and hopefully the afterlife too /me ducks the tomatoes.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Religion in the Monastery.
by Mr. Muskrat (Canon) on May 12, 2004 at 23:17 UTC

    I read my Bible while riding the train home after work. Today I read a passage that I think fits in with what you had to say today.

    Luke 3:11-14 (KJV)
    11 He answereth and saith unto them, He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise.
    12 Then came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, what shall we do?
    13 And he said unto them, Exact no more than that which is appointed you.
    14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.

    The footnote says: "Personal response to God brings with it practical expression. Meat is food in general. People are not expected to come out of the world (see 1 Cor. 5:10) but to be loyal to their God in the midst of their secular responsibilities." -- The King James Study Bible published by Thomas Nelson Publishers.

    And just in case you cannot fully comprehend the King James Version, here is the same passage from the New International Version:
    11 John answered, "The man with two tunics should share with him who has none, and the one who has food should do the same."
    12 Tax collectors also came to be baptized. "Teacher," they asked, "what should we do?"
    13 "Don't collect any more than you are required to," he told them. Then some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?"
    14 He replied, "Don't extort money and don't accuse people falsely--be content with your pay."

      If I may reframe that in the Perlmonks context: He who hath a good module, let him impart it to him who hath none, and he that hath a good bug-fix, let him do likewise.

      I may not be religious, but I can definitely get behind that.

      And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, ... And he said unto them, Do violence to no man ...

      Doesn't a soldier's job quite possibly involve doing violence to other men? I wonder what happened to that part in the New International Version?

        Remember that this passage is supposed to hit home at a personal level and soldiers are (generally) a violent lot. Also at the time (as is still the case in some countries), the soldiers were more than soldiers, they were the main police force. By "Do violence to no man", I believe that John the Baptist was telling them not to abuse their position.

        I think that "Don't extort money" fits with no violence since violence is usually needed to extort money.