That’s not the problem. The problem is the abundance of assholes using selected parts of the Bible to manipulate others while conveniently ignoring other parts of the Bible that contradict them. They choose what parts they want to hear, and then act like they’re unassailable edicts that came straight from God.
Oh, and that changes from day to day, minute to minute. It’s not consistent in any way. The only consistent part is their surety of existence of something that does not, and never did, exist.
The problem is the abundance of assholes using selected parts of the Bible to manipulate others while conveniently ignoring other parts of the Bible that contradict them.
This has absolutely nothing to do with contradictions or lack thereof, though. You can just as easily cherry-pick something that has no contradictions.
Disagree. If the document was completely logical & self-supporting, then there’d be no need to cherry pick as anything said would be consistent with the whole. You could highlight certain aspects, but that’s not cherry-picking.
If the document was completely logical & self-supporting, then there’d be no need to cherry pick as anything said would be consistent with the whole.
You’re assuming that the entire document has a single message, which is absolutely not a given. Simple hypothetical:
If the Bible said nothing more than these things:
Abortion is bad
You should tithe 10% of your income to the church
The earth is 6000 years old
And you were someone who was on board with the first two but not the third, it’d be cherry-picking to call yourself an adherent of the Bible while citing your belief/agreement in/with the first two while ignoring the third, even though none of the three things above contradict each other.
That’s not the problem. The problem is the abundance of assholes using selected parts of the Bible to manipulate others while conveniently ignoring other parts of the Bible that contradict them. They choose what parts they want to hear, and then act like they’re unassailable edicts that came straight from God.
Cherry pickers, every single one of them.
Oh, and that changes from day to day, minute to minute. It’s not consistent in any way. The only consistent part is their surety of existence of something that does not, and never did, exist.
This has absolutely nothing to do with contradictions or lack thereof, though. You can just as easily cherry-pick something that has no contradictions.
That’s non-sequitur.
Disagree. If the document was completely logical & self-supporting, then there’d be no need to cherry pick as anything said would be consistent with the whole. You could highlight certain aspects, but that’s not cherry-picking.
You’re assuming that the entire document has a single message, which is absolutely not a given. Simple hypothetical:
If the Bible said nothing more than these things:
And you were someone who was on board with the first two but not the third, it’d be cherry-picking to call yourself an adherent of the Bible while citing your belief/agreement in/with the first two while ignoring the third, even though none of the three things above contradict each other.