Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
The insistence on changing the definitions of words and terms in the manner you do is a form of equivocation. By not using the standard meaning of the terms, you imply that what is covered by the term "religious activity" is definitionally deficient. When you admit that you use a different definition, then you admit that this is the game you play.
Maybe you would be better served by speaking directly to what is problematic. It is not that it is "religious activity" because there is no agreed upon definition for that term that gets you what you want. Instead, just state that vain repetition is not a spiritual activity. We would all agree upon that. But whether "religious activity" is not spiritual is not agreed upon.
The Bible itself does not agree with you that "religion" is bad. And it does not address "religious activity." And if religion is not bad, then the activities that are associated with it would not be bad.
So work with what is true rather than just what you want to be true.
|
Obw it is clear we have different definitions of religion. But my definition is the one held by most born again evangelical protestants ..i already posted got questions. Org.
The definition you subscribe to implies that christianity is a religion and not a relationship. It is more a catholic view.