Re: Sacred tangent (was Re: just checking...)
Johne Cook <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
As we were talking about sacred documents, I had confined my definition to that facet. Johne Cook | http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com | On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Peter T. Chattaway < petert-LOVM4QxV+tDq6eQxt3vRmLDks+cytr/[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Johne Cook wrote: > >> I know of precisely one sacred document, the Bible. >> > > FWIW, I'm willing to extend the term to other religious artefacts as well > -- icons, the Eucharist, etc. "Sacred" does not necessarily mean "uniquely > divinely inspired", but it *does* mean "religious" -- and the problem with > calling any secular document "sacred" is that you elevate it beyond its > purely secular function and into something else. > > > -- > dadl-ot mailing list > http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot > -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot