You're proabably not going to get very far speaking on matters of faith. I'd say the board members [ha!] are pretty pragmatic. I believe in some translations that it can be interpreted as "stewardship", not "mastery". Some folks don't handle absolute power in a rational way.

pdaoust you sound quite reasonable, it's just we get people like onyxcougar who feels the need to point out that evolution is clearly wrong at every given opportunity.

Personally I just love the phrase "every creeping thing that creepeth", I can't wait to work that into conversation somehow.

yeah, you're right. I was grumpy this morning. It's just that we've had that discussion several times, and it twists my nipples when people tell me that GOD said it because it's in the bible. God did not write the bible, man did. and the hippie thing was a joke, because I'm some fucking hippie. the dumbass comment was indeed a generalization, but it isn't neccessarily incorrect. dumbasses HAVE been regurgitating that line of thinking. There are several christians here that i completely respect, like smooth, OC, and mrnoodle?? (awol) but I think it's wrong for people to espouse the notion that we are free to do as we please to the other animals on this planet just because it says so in that book. If I were to believe in the christian god for the sake of this discussion, it would be my position that he'd want us to treat them with respect even as we eat them, or use their resources for clothing, etc. tormenting them and then killing them is NOT OK. I dont care if you're christian, muslim or martian. just common sense. I am tolerant of other religions. Intolerant of dumbasses.

As a non-xtian, but a student of people, language, and the mind, the word dominion makes perfect sense.

That was written at a time when there was a greater undestanding of the concepts of lordship and royalty. At that time dominion had more of an implied responsibility to whatever or whomever you had dominion over.

The concept "noblesse oblige" comes to mind.

Similar to the suberviant wife you're meant to do a very good job of making sure is happy I think.

Just to poke needles at the burning ljim:

The Qur'an came fairly directly. God -> Gabriel -> Mohammad -> people; a little while after the prophet croaked, they wrote it down. A few years later they standardized it into one authoritative copy. The society then (and its remnants now) had a strong oral culture: memorizing stuff thoroughly was commonplace. Is it this more justifiably the 'word of god'?

nope

Heavy with the vitriole today jaguar?

I said it made sense in the context of the time it was written in and that it is now not understood properly by people.

As far as noblesse oblige goes, I'm fine with it as long as both people agree to the terms of the relationship. If one side or the other is unhappy about it, it is their responsibility to change the terms of that relationship or the nature of their relative power levels.

Relax.

:p Wasn't Christ the lamb of God?

It also served it purpose in those times that it was rewritten, too.

TS, there is no e at the end of vitriol and you misunderstood me. I was being perfectly serious. I don't know the specifics (the only books I'd read that are that fat have Stepherson on the cover) but as far as I am aware the verses to do with the wife being subservient to the man imply the same thing - a level of responsibility for well-being that comes with power. It does indeed make sense in when you take into account the temporal context and everyone loves picking their favorite bits of scripture only these days.

I was simply pointing out the similarity in the misunderstanding of both bits, that's all. Yeesh, absent minded caustic posting, I should watch that.

WHAT'S THAT SMELL??

Oh, someone left the Irony on

i think TS thought you were referring to his and ladysidhe's brief spat that made it up here

Very tasty with mint jelly.