Buy this product here: LGBT Save Everyone’s Planet Shirt, hoodie, tank top
Home page: Beutee Store
LGBT Save Everyone’s Planet Shirt, hoodie, tank top
I was not advocating for or against any particular set of text which may or may not be called scripture.
My point is that even an enlightened and finely tuned process of hermeneutics and exegesis can lead to variations as to what the text means.
In law we deal with interpretation daily. That is what the discussion of the nominated Supreme Court Justice is all about. What method of hermeneutics and exegesis does he use to interpret the constitution?
The same inquiry is made when pastors of churches are selected.
The Sunni and Shia look at the same Koran but interpret it differently. Baptists and Methodists do the same with the bible text. Lawyers and judges do the same with the constitution.
Neocons and liberals do the same with recent history. The Pharisees and the Sadduccees had the same problem with the Pentateuch.
But when people use a reasonable and unbiased process of hermeneutics and exegesis there is a way to work things out.
As you know the Talmud is a collection of legal interpretations. One of the more favorable versions is the Babylonian Talmud, purportedly written in what is now Iraq.
One of the rules of interpretation developed in that line of jurisprudence, which rule I find to be better than our own, has to do with what we now call stare decisis.
Our modern version is not very clear, and I dare say not many could explain it because it is not very clear.
Our version of stare decisis is even in danger of getting down to raw power … Political power. When one party gets in the law is one way, but then the other party gets in and the law switches back.
The sanhedrin method was more advanced. It required