---

One of the most annoying arguments I've had with someone was over how I told them I hadn't any inclination to believe in a literal, modern interpretation of Revelation dealing with current events in worldwide socio-political struggles and conflicts.  Of course, the argument tends to dwindle once I ask them their definition of Apocalyptic Writing versus general Prophecy.  What they tend to not quite understand is that although Apocalyptic writings generally are considered Prophetic, not all Prophecy is Apocalyptic.

---

And the most annoying after that?

-------
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means
What you think it means." -Inigo Montoya

---

Quote: from Soren Kierkegaard at 5:28 pm on June 16, 2008

---

One of the most annoying arguments I've had with someone was over how I told them I hadn't any inclination to believe in a literal, modern interpretation of Revelation dealing with current events in worldwide socio-political struggles and conflicts. Of course, the argument tends to dwindle once I ask them their definition of Apocalyptic Writing versus general Prophecy. What they tend to not quite understand is that although Apocalyptic writings generally are considered Prophetic, not all Prophecy is Apocalyptic.

---

And the most annoying after that?

---

Or is it that the Fictional characters are reading a reference of literature that exists outside of the story?

Or is it that The Fictional Characters are reading a book that coincidently resembles The Bible?

But, I understand now, you separate yourself from the mainstream understanding of The Bible. That helps me understand you better. It seemed to me you were always on the verge of citing a bunch of Bible Passages and calling for demons to leave me. That was my own misinterpretation though.

Anyway, off subject, kind of, would you agree that Jesus could be considered to have an overwhelming literal-modern interpretation, or do you only apply that practice to socio-political interpretations of Revelations and whatever else the Vatican is proven wrong about?

-------
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means
What you think it means." -Inigo Montoya

---

Well... I'm not black, so that is sort of a bad analogy. Second of all, it's generally well known that Production company's and Tom Hanks don't involve themselves in hate Crimes. (Hopefully there isn't an article reporting the opposite.)

Second of all, it's mostly a fictional account of a mans discovery of the alleged Path of The Illuminati.

Furthermore, read the my initial post and my replies. I don't have a problem with The Vatican exercising it's right to deny the filming of their "Bedroom".

I did state that The Vatican was quoted saying, "It turns the Gospel Upside Down." And I can only assume that the comments are regarding to a few of the only references of the Bible in the Angels and Demons. (Only one of which was actually used in the book.)  

"the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved."
""the LORD set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." ""And the sun rises and sets and returns to its place, etc." All of those being from Chronicles, Psalms, and Ecclesiastes. Anyone aware of those being mentioned as Gospels?

So why can't The Vatican be honest about why they don't want them Shooting Around Rome and Vatican City?

---

Um, who says they aren't being honest? Very few people actually think that the RCC is covering up any of the supposed "controversies" mentioned in Dan Brown's books. Could it possibly be that they simply aren't interested in endorsing something that drags their name through the mud?

Nah, couldn't be.  

-------
Let yourself be enchanted,
You just might break through
To ever ever after

---

Quote: from Kokasion at 8:31 pm on June 16, 2008

---

Well... I'm not black, so that is sort of a bad analogy. Second of all, it's generally well known that Production company's and Tom Hanks don't involve themselves in hate Crimes. (Hopefully there isn't an article reporting the opposite.)  

 Second of all, it's mostly a fictional account of a mans discovery of the alleged Path of The Illuminati.  

 Furthermore, read the my initial post and my replies. I don't have a problem with The Vatican exercising it's right to deny the filming of their "Bedroom".  

 I did state that The Vatican was quoted saying, "It turns the Gospel Upside Down." And I can only assume that the comments are regarding to a few of the only references of the Bible in the Angels and Demons. (Only one of which was actually used in the book.)

 "the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved."  
 ""the LORD set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." ""And the sun rises and sets and returns to its place, etc." All of those being from Chronicles, Psalms, and Ecclesiastes. Anyone aware of those being mentioned as Gospels?  

 So why can't The Vatican be honest about why they don't want them Shooting Around Rome and Vatican City?

---

Um, who says they aren't being honest? Very few people actually think that the RCC is covering up any of the supposed "controversies" mentioned in Dan Brown's books. Could it possibly be that they simply aren't interested in endorsing something that drags their name through the mud?

Nah, couldn't be.

---

You mean like the distinction between Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and another Assumed Mary (Who's name has never been verified) to be blurred; the latter's reputation ultimately being confused with Mary Magdalene's. Dragging her name through the mud. (Another controversy Dan Brown's Character passionately argues.)

Unfortunately, for The Vatican, they need to take a lot more action than Denying Filming rights to pull their name from the depths of filth they've wrought upon themselves. (Melodramatic-stylistic writing makes me seem more right I suppose.)

-------
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means
What you think it means." -Inigo Montoya

---

Ah. I see. Well, it doesn't mean it doesn't refer to true historical elements. Either way, you don't care. Remember?

---

---

You mean like the distinction between Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and another Assumed Mary (Who's name has never been verified) to be blurred; the latter's reputation ultimately being confused with Mary Magdalene's. Dragging her name through the mud. (Another controversy Dan Brown's Character passionately argues.)

Unfortunately, for The Vatican, they need to take a lot more action than Denying Filming rights to pull their name from the depths of filth they've wrought upon themselves. (Melodramatic-stylistic writing makes me seem more right I suppose.)

---

I don't think you get it. It's not about making themselves look good. It's about saying, "This is heresy according to what we believe, and we are not going to endorse it." Nothing more, nothing less.

-------
Let yourself be enchanted,
You just might break through
To ever ever after

---

Quote: from Kokasion at 6:10 pm on June 16, 2008

---

Ah. I see. Well, it doesn't mean it doesn't refer to true historical elements. Either way, you don't care. Remember?

---

And here is where your ignorance between application of interpretation and mere preference comes to light.

---

Theologians don't let their preference get in the way of exploring religious concepts of God. If they do, then they're ignoring the Skepticism that should influence the Chastity of their work. Maybe you should seriously consider that concept again.

-------
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means
What you think it means." -Inigo Montoya

---

Quote: from Kokasion at 10:38 pm on June 16, 2008

---

You mean like the distinction between Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and another Assumed Mary (Who's name has never been verified) to be blurred; the latter's reputation ultimately being confused with Mary Magdalene's. Dragging her name through the mud. (Another controversy Dan Brown's Character passionately argues.)  

 Unfortunately, for The Vatican, they need to take a lot more action than Denying Filming rights to pull their name from the depths of filth they've wrought upon themselves. (Melodramatic-stylistic writing makes me seem more right I suppose.)

---

I don't think you get it. It's not about making themselves look good. It's about saying, "This is heresy according to what we believe, and we are not going to endorse it." Nothing more, nothing less.

---

You're right, that's what they're saying, but I'm not so naive to take what people say at face value.

Of course, I've heard numerous times from friends, "You think too much." which I assume they mean, "You're over analyzing things." And in some cases, among friendships I might. But in this case, I'm sure I'm not. I don't believe what most Extortionists say is completely their intention.

-------
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means
What you think it means." -Inigo Montoya

---

Quote: from Soren Kierkegaard at 8:24 am on June 17, 2008

---

Quote: from Kokasion at 6:10 pm on June 16, 2008

---

Ah. I see. Well, it doesn't mean it doesn't refer to true historical elements. Either way, you don't care. Remember?

---

And here is where your ignorance between application of interpretation and mere preference comes to light.

---

Theologians don't let their preference get in the way of exploring religious concepts of God. If they do, then they're ignoring the Skepticism that should influence the Chastity of their work. Maybe you should seriously consider that concept again.

---

---

Quote: from Kokasion at 8:56 am on June 17, 2008

---

Quote: from Soren Kierkegaard at 8:24 am on June 17, 2008

---

Quote: from Kokasion at 6:10 pm on June 16, 2008

---

Ah. I see. Well, it doesn't mean it doesn't refer to true historical elements. Either way, you don't care. Remember?

---

And here is where your ignorance between application of interpretation and mere preference comes to light.

---

 

 Theologians don't let their preference get in the way of exploring religious concepts of God. If they do, then they're ignoring the Skepticism that should influence the Chastity of their work. Maybe you should seriously consider that concept again.

---

Doesn't mean that you must adhere to a general notion of relativism in order to be a Theologian, my friend.  And as I have told you via the email, please refrain from trying to speak down to me as though I am in need of your perilous words of wisdom.

---

I'm only saying, if I were going to study Psychology I wouldn't ignore discoveries made by Neurology that render a thesis I've written obsolete. Bad Analogy.

I apologize for any offense.

-------
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means
What you think it means." -Inigo Montoya

---

You're right, that's what they're saying, but I'm not so naive to take what people say at face value.

Of course, I've heard numerous times from friends, "You think too much." which I assume they mean, "You're over analyzing things." And in some cases, among friendships I might. But in this case, I'm sure I'm not. I don't believe what most Extortionists say is completely their intention.

---

Then you're a fool and, in my humble opinion, so determined to make the RCC look bad in your mind that you'll believe even the craziest conspiracy theory. There is no reason for them to be dishonest in this case, except possibly to the terminally insane.

-------
Let yourself be enchanted,
You just might break through
To ever ever after

---

Quote: from Kokasion at 12:00 pm on June 17, 2008

---

You're right, that's what they're saying, but I'm not so naive to take what people say at face value.  

 Of course, I've heard numerous times from friends, "You think too much." which I assume they mean, "You're over analyzing things." And in some cases, among friendships I might. But in this case, I'm sure I'm not. I don't believe what most Extortionists say is completely their intention.  

 

---

Then you're a fool and, in my humble opinion, so determined to make the RCC look bad in your mind that you'll believe even the craziest conspiracy theory. There is no reason for them to be dishonest in this case, except possibly to the terminally insane.

---

Ad Hominem.

Too bad you don't present any evidence that supports your rebuttals, or I might be inclined to come back to Sanity.  

-------
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means
What you think it means." -Inigo Montoya