Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
See post 386. My remark about religion that you replied to was focussed on vain repitition that untohim mentioned in his post. I did not jump to a different topic..you did. So I replied to you on the topic of vain repitition...not religion. I dont want to discuss the meaning of religion and religious activity again when gotquestions.org adequately descibes it.
|
Did you actually read my post?
You failed to respond to my comment. I said that a "religious activity" is not, by definition, something that is bad or to be avoided. I also was not saying that vain repetition is good, or in any way defending that.
You are throwing the term "religious activity" around as if it is, by definition, only false, unspiritual, or inappropriate. I do not agree. "Religious activity" can refer to many quite acceptable, appropriate, and proper activities. It can also refer to those like Unto had commented on.
With a proper understanding of "religious activities" you actually said that vain repetition exists — without any comment on appropriateness. But you intended it to be an agreement that vain repetition is inappropriate. To say that, calling it a "religious activity" fails because it is not simply the collection of inappropriate activities. It is like saying that misreading the Bible is reading the Bible when you meant to say that misreading the Bible is a problem.
Get it now?