Alchemist, in what way do our political forms follow the Hittitean! What country do you think you live in?

You’re right alchemy does have pre-Christian origins but if you want to really understand what your screen name means read about the goals and thinking of the Mediaeval alchemists – this is the point.

John’s Gospel written in 650AD? Are you deliberately writing nonsense or did that just come from the top of your head? Scholars who don’t have a bone of faith in their body date John between 60-110 A.D. It was written by Jesus’ best friend. The closest John could do justice to Jesus was with the poetry he uses in this last of four biographies. You’ll get some dispute about the authorship from some scholars but I reckon they’re knuckle heads.

The tiny gay minority has no right weakening the meaning of marriage for everyone. An argument I introduced via an external link was that this is this is a kind of totalitarian aim, that they're not thinking of what further damage it will do to society. Prof Shell argued this point. You don't add to the discussion, your refuge is ad hominem argument.

Who is frightened of difference? It's gays who want to be seen to be like everyone else, but they’re not, they are different. It is they who should be happy with their difference and not seek the sanctions and assistance that rightly belong to those who wish to bring children into the world (all things being equal). Spengler shows us the demographic horror facing the west.

Apart from bared faced lies, your posts' distinguishing feature is rudeness and slander. You see history in black and white, with no nuance – the hallmark of an intellectual fraud. Ordinarily I would laugh at such hysterical rants, but because I'm new I gave you the benefit of the doubt. One or two might get their kicks out your silly posts but most would see you simply as narrow and boorish.

Martin
Just a few points.
1) Marriage has NOTHING to do with having & raising children. Need I point out that men & women need hardly be married to have & raise kids. Well why does every society possess a rite of marriage you ask? The answer is quite simple. Marriage is necessary to secure inheritance rights & confirm alliances. In other words it was about property & power. Hence the reason why, until fairly recently in the world's history arranged marriages were the norm. The bride & groom rarely saw each other until the wedding day. There was no need for that if the whole point of marriage was property & power.

2) you assert that gays being married would inevitably weaken marriage for everyone. If this is inevitable why hasn't it happened in countries where gay marriages are legal such as Spain?
In fact can you provide me with proof, not just an argument but proof, that allowing gay marriages would INEVITABLY lead to a lessening of the bonds of marriage for all heterosexual couples? After all we are talking about writing discrimination into the law. That is an awful risk to take for the whole of society. For us to consider such a risk worthwhile you would have to prove that gay marriages would INEVITABLY, not just possibly, lead to a breakdown of marriage.
Finally would such a breakdown of marriage lead to a divorce rate of over 50% of marriages? Then I would argue that it's too late. It's already happening. So we might as well allow gay marriages.
If you are arguing that something even more dire would occure then give me examples from history where this has occured. Otherwise you would have to admit, if you are honest, that your ideas are based on nothing more than speculation.

Dear sad Martin Ibn Warriq, you wrote,”Where do you think the idea of the secular comes from?” My example, Hittites. How sad, changing what people say, in your poor attempt to shore up your delusions

I understand my screen name, it relates to world realities, not christian fallacies. Alchemy does not relate to anything religious, but relates to the investigation of the changing universe, from all aspects. Not your narrow viewpoint

Martin, the first lesson here, is to learn to read peoples posts, a failing with most of the religious that bumble along here. I wrote, “As John was written sometime in the 2nd century,” Who's lying.

Jesus's best friend, as written in trhe original Greek text, and the gnostic texts, was Mary, who was his greatest love along side Sarah. John was a jew, and like most of that era, was virtually illiterate. The text of those letters, was written in Greek, not hebrew and contains many notations on the scribes interpretations of their writings. Thats where you get the true meaning, not from a fictional bible.

As you appear to know nothing of theological history, I won't burden you with it, this is a thread about same sex unions. But I can understand your attempt at promoting delusion, to cover your fear of reality.

Homosexuals are like everyone else, Bosk points this out very well.

Your quote “The tiny gay minority has no right weakening the meaning of marriage for everyone” I would look at the sexual practises of the representatives of religion, to see who has had the biggest effect on weakening marriage and promoting sexual debauchery.

What right does the tiny minority religious have in weakening our secular society to force its violent beliefs upon us, when only 9% of Australia's population set foot in a place of worship. That does include all religions.

Its your minority thats the problem.

“the hallmark of an intellectual fraud.” are those that change what people say and try to change historical fact, not those that have spent many years studying theological history, up close.

To Mr Bosk.

I agree that equality is a very important guiding principle in law. But equality is not, never has been, nor ever will be, the over riding consideration of legislators when they are considering whether laws should be enacted or repealed.

Inequality is a fact of life within the law today, usually with very good reason. No violent criminal is ever going to get anywhere by claiming that convicted armed robbers have a right to own a firearm, simply on the basis of “equality.” Neither is any Feminist going to get anywhere by demanding legal sanction against the sexist inequality which exists within either the hierarchy of the Catholic Church and the Islamic faith. Your conviction that legal authority is valid only if it recognises the concept of absolute legal equality is self evidently wrong.

And where you got the notion that law has nothing to do with morality, is anybodies guess. But once again, you are clearly wrong. The laws of every society are based upon the prevailing moralities of the dominant culture. Culture is the primary factor in understanding human behaviour, and it is the cultural values of every society that determine its particular moral code. What is considered legal or illegal behaviour within every society is a product of its culturally derived moral values.

Martin Ibn Warriq,

I like to welcome you to this forum. I have enjoyed your comments so far.

I wouldn’t worry about dear old Al - he, she or it (no one really knows) lives in a world of his making. He uses words like fantasy, delusion, fear, insecurity, illusion... quite a lot. And that’s when he/she/it is in a good mood. Actually I’m surprised they are allowed laptops over there now…

He, she or it has never added anything worth debating, and gets high on infuriating others by spraying his/hers/its intellectual venom on anyone and everyone.

As a special treat, after he/she/it catches a fish or two, he/she/it would delight in skinning a Christian or two for desert.

P.S. he/she/it still doesn’t know about the other major religion so in the meantime he/she/it has got us to amuse him/her/itself with.

I think he/she/it could make millions writing the sequel to The Davinci Code. There is definitely a huge market for that sort of historically researched junk.

So let’s continue to pray for such people and for ourselves in dealing with them that we remain honest, humble and alert.

. If you believe Australia is secular because of the Hittite ppl after the proof I gave there is nothing I can do to gainsay you. I’ve told you its origins in our society, its uncontroversial.

. ‘World realities’ ? Being vague isn’t helping. “Alchemy, said Jung, stands in a compensatory relationship to mainstream Christianity”. http://www.gnosis.org/jung_alchemy.htm To understand Alchemy you have to understand Jung. I just assumed you already knew this.

There’s no good reason to believe John was written after 70 A.D. I choose Christian conservationist scholars. I thought you put forward 650 AD as the date of authorship apologies. But title additions and cannabis oil? I think you need to stay off the oil yourself Al.

If you source Gnostic sources rather than canonical ones that is going against all rules of historical scholarship. Why are the four canonical? Because the Gnostic ones were rejected by those who knew they were tosh. If the canonical gospels were rubbish they wouldn’t have lasted two seconds. They were accepted by the community, many who had known Jesus were still alive and could confirm or refute the text.

Some clergy have behaved wickedly, a much higher level of moral behaviour is rightly expected of them. It is far rarer than in regular society. This has to be held against the overwhelming majority of men and women who have given up much to serve the community. You prefer to smear and slander.

Secularism needs no help its destroying itself http://www.newcriterion.com/archives/24/01/its-the-demography/
http://www.newcriterion.com/archives/24/01/after-the-suicide/

I have some serious reservations about your theological training Al.