Posted by Pangea (188.8.131.52) on April 18, 2004 at 17:18:36:
In Reply to: To Pangea on Mosiac problems Part 8 posted by Christian Scholar on April 17, 2004 at 21:51:47:
YOU POSTED: "Many things God forbid was due to this symbolic relationship issue. You donít agree, but that is what the Bible teaches."
Well, I agree that Jewish priests were interested in symbolism and in setting their religion apart from the pantheistic religions around them.
However, this in no way convinces me that God was interested in such matters. It's still a stupid symbol as far as I'm concerned. But all religions have their fair share of meaningful symbols and not-so-meaningful symbols.
It's of no consequence in the grand scheme of things. We ecologicall-oriented biologists have our little quirks of meaningful symbols too. We like to see native species preserved in their native habitats. It's kind of a "purity" thing with us. We strive for it, but also recognize that the reality of the world is such that it is no longer possible except in rare areas. But we strive anyway!
IMHO, God is probably more interested in a healthy, life-sustaining environment than He is in a woven garment or a plate Lobster fra Diavlo.
Post a Followup