Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!dave
From: dave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: 'G-d' and destroying holy names - re - (nf)
Message-ID: <3047@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Jan-84 12:40:31 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.3047
Posted: Fri Jan  6 12:40:31 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 6-Jan-84 13:33:41 EST
References: <4710@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Organization: The Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 27

--  From: andree@uokvax.UUCP
--  Even more interesting: why the distinction between two forms of media,
--  both of which require special equipment to read? I'm speaking of
--  microfilm and disk, of course.

I understand that the difference is that microfilm is still "writing"
in the conventional sense. A physical copy exists on the medium; and
with some microfilm, you can read it (perhaps not very well) without
any special equipment. Also, the special equipment is really no different
than a pair of glasses. Disk, on the other hand, does not store something
written. It stores a bunch of magnetic impulses which your computer
CONVERTS to print on your terminal.

--  However - this is all moot. Religions are religions because they aren't
--  suspectible to rational argument. Hence, you should do as whoever you
--  believe to have the best line to the appropriate diety instructs you
--  in this matter.

True; although in Judaism we don't really think of any rabbi as having
a "line" to the Deity. Rabbinic answers to questions are based on learning,
scholarship and religious observance.


Dave Sherman
Toronto
-- 
 {allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!dave