Existe alguém escrevendo sobre religião em português?

{{ Trnaslation:

Is there a place where I can discuss religion in Portuguese?

-sma
}}
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

nospam@nospam.com wrote...
>
>
>
> "Life is Hell" wrote in message
> >
> > pia_sten@hotmail.com wrote...
> > >
> > > can anyone recomend a good book for a beginner wanting to study the
> > > bible?
> >
> > What's wrong with using the Bible, combined with prayer to gain
> > understanding into the meaning of troublesome passages as they occur?
> >
> > That's all you need.
>
> Not really. You can pray until you are blue in the face, but the chances
> you'll get a direct revelation fro God as to who the Saducees, Caesar and
> Herod were are slim. It's very unlikely God will reveal in a vision where
> Damascus is in relation to Jerusalem.

Guess it really gets down to what you're reading the Bible for,
doesn't it? The original poster didn't say. The person you're
replying to apparently assumed it was for spiritual reasons, and
you're apparently counter-assuming it was for history and geography.

> I'm curious: do you read the Bible in the original languages? I doubt it.
> I'm pretty sure you read a translation. So... you read the product of other
> people's study of material outside of Scripture (in case you didn't notice,
> the Bible doesn't include an Inspired Lexicon) but you'd suggest that
> someone else deprive themselves of the same. that's pretty weak.
>
> Rufus

Speaking of weak, your examples are easily addressed by any decent
encyclopedia.

How about if you leave the pointless flaming for the alt.* groups?

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

In article <084.40.09.05.500504000@srcbs.org>, basicallyblues says...
>
>
>
>>At least you should
>>give credit to your resources.
>
>why?

Because it is basic to intellecual honesty. I know you find this hard to
understand, but most others in the NG _do_ understand it.

> so you can distract attention off the Bible and find fault with
>the resources?

That is a pretty poor distraction. No, that is not likely to be his reason. It
is certainly not mine.

A better reason, _especially_ when dealing with someone who is either deeply
dishonest or incredibly irresponsible, (such as yourself), is so that the reader
can check the original source and see whether or not you quoted him out of
context -- as you so often do.

> No thanks. I've