Originally posted by FMF
You keep mentioning "FMF's holy water" but anyone who has read our discussion will know that it is an invention of yours and you are using it avoid addressing the arguments I have made. The only "pagan element" in a crucifix is the one invested in it by "pagans" or by non-pagans who invest a "pagan element" meaning in it. The crucifix itself is an inanimate obje ...[text shortened]... oundbite over and over and over again across different threads does not address my point at all.

its a fitting invention to describe the process whereby you think you can simply eradicate antiquity.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its a fitting invention to describe the process whereby you think you can simply eradicate antiquity.

There is no attempt to "eradicate antiquity". It seems as if you do not know what a symbol is. A symbol only has the meaning that humans invest in it. The meaning invested back in "antiquity" is only relevant in so far as you or "pagans" invest that "pagan meaning" in it today or whenever. The meaning of a symbol is a human construct; the inanimate object has no meaning in and of itself, regardless of whether we look at it now or look at it in "antiquity".

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Perhaps you are correct but Effhims Holy water has magical properties, it can erase three thousand years of antiquity and change a pagan element into a Christian one!

that would be interesting to watch. Unfortunately, in my presence, things not of God don't work. period!

Originally posted by FMF
There is no attempt to "eradicate antiquity". It seems as if you do not know what a symbol is. A symbol only has the meaning that humans invest in it. The meaning invested back in "antiquity" is only relevant in so far as you or "pagans" invest that "pagan meaning" in it today or whenever. The meaning of a symbol is a human construct; the inanimate object has no meaning in and of itself, regardless of whether we look at it now or look at it in "antiquity".

yes yes sprinkle sprinkle, I understand.

Originally posted by Pudgenik
that would be interesting to watch. Unfortunately, in my presence, things not of God don't work. period!

but if you were on the magical Island of Indonesia there is no telling what might transpire!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes yes sprinkle sprinkle, I understand.

Your "FMF's holy water" invention and repeated references to it are nothing but you avoiding addressing the arguments I am making. You are seemingly unable to discuss what symbols are and how they derive meaning.

Originally posted by FMF
Your "FMF's holy water" invention and repeated references to it are nothing but you avoiding addressing the arguments I am making. You are seemingly unable to discuss what symbols are and how they derive meaning.

I have addressed the arguments that you have made aplenty and I have acknowledged that even the same symbol can have different meanings for different people. This does not in any way negate the symbols antiquity, an antiquity that you have refused to acknowledge despite being presented with evidence. So enough of the pretence of avoiding any issues! its simply hard to respect that kind of statement.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I dont despise anything except the BBC for marginalizing Scotland.

Are you going to vote for independence?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Are you going to vote for independence?

No I am not a Scottish nationalist.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have addressed the arguments that you have made aplenty and I have acknowledged that even the same symbol can have different meanings for different people. This does not in any way negate the symbols antiquity, an antiquity that you have refused to acknowledge despite being presented with evidence. So enough of the pretence of avoiding any issues! its simply hard to respect that kind of statement.

If you have accepted that symbols only have the meaning that people apply to them and that there is no "pagan element" in the crucifix symbol for Indonesian Christians, and that the "antiquity" of "pagan meaning" [regardless of how long ago pagans did or thought whatever they did, in whatever part of the world it is you have in mind] is all irrelevant to Indonesian Christians, then I think you have at last accepted the issues and stopped avoiding them.

Originally posted by FMF
If you have accepted that symbols only have the meaning that people apply to them and that there is no "pagan element" in the crucifix symbol for Indonesian Christians, and that the "antiquity" of "pagan meaning" [regardless of how long pagans did or thought whatever they did,in whatever part of the world it is you have in mind] is all irrelevant to Indonesian Christians, then I think you have at last accepted the issues and stopped avoiding them.

there is whether they recognise it or not, whether they feel its relevant or not or anything else for that matter, unless of course they are simply willing like you to ignore antiquity or conveniently douse their crosses with Holy water.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there is whether they recognise it or not, unless of course they are simply willing like you to ignore antiquity.

A symbol only has the meaning that humans attach to it. If they attach a meaning stretching back to antiquity then that is the meaning that those people attach to it. If they don't, then that meaning from antiquity quite simply is not attached to the symbol for those people. You cannot project your perceptions of the crucifix's symbolism onto Indonesian Christians, robbie. You just can't do it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
there is whether they recognise it or not, whether they feel its relevant or not or anything else for that matter, unless of course they are simply willing like you to ignore antiquity or conveniently douse their crosses with Holy water.

Ah the "holy water" reference again. You are still mentioning that to evade addressing my point.

Is the symbolism of the swastika for the Hindus the same as it is for Nazis?

Originally posted by FMF
Ah the "holy water" reference again. You are still mentioning that to evade addressing my point.

Is the symbolism of the swastika for the Hindus the same as it is for Nazis?

sigh can you tell me what is it about this statement I made that you fail to understand?

I have acknowledged that even the same symbol can have different meanings for different people

Do you understand how thoroughly tedious is it to have to say the same thing again and again and again?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have acknowledged that even the same symbol can have different meanings for different people

That's right. For you, the crucifix has "pagan symbolism". For Indonesian Christians, the crucifix has no "pagan symbolism". The symbols ~ their meanings ~ are different. This has been my argument all along.