• ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    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.

    That’s non-sequitur.

    • FunctionallyLiterate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      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.

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        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.