Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarpen
|
Then you need to explain what a priest of Baal might be.
Or a priestess of Astarte.
Thousands of archćologists have an answer based on several centuries of experience, together with concrete evidence. That doesn't mean what they say is always right of course, but they all know who or what Baal was and that he had priests.
With your nose glued to some banal search engine (I know you didn't actually click either link) and zero experience "in the field" how can you ever make a value judgement about which definitions might be accurate? Words signify ideas or objects and which word signifies which idea is determined by usage. How do you know what usage prevails if you never have any contact with the people who actually
use the words? You don't know what
we mean, for example.
Did Astarte have priests? Your dictionary would say "NO" (but you haven't read Webster's at all: you don't know what it says). A priest is an intermediary. There is no such thing as a Christian priest because
ACCORDING TO THE SOURCE MATERIAL OF CHRISTIANITY there is
NO LONGER A RÔLE FOR ANY INTERMEDIARY: it is explicitly stated to be so.
Which is the more reliable source concerning Christianity would you say?
A 3rd hand dictionary definition or THE ACTUAL SOURCE MATERIAL ITSELF?
People might pretend to be anything, oxym
oronic (
e.g. a Christian "priest") or simple deception (the drug dealer who pretends to be your friend). It doesn't alter what they really are.
But I may have been hasty. There's some additional material that might be appropriate
HERE. Let me know how you get on.