You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #22: You start off with the wrong premise... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
Sal316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-29-09 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #10
22. You start off with the wrong premise...
....and only get worse.

First "or that matter the knowledge to pick and choose from the Bible what to believe, and what to discard?"

There's not a single place where I said, or even implied, that it was about picking and choosing what to believe and what to discard. I appreciate your attempt to redefine the argument to something you're familiar with, but it won't work with me.

It is you who claim that your book is holy, but yet somehow you feel free to interpret it any way that you like. If a book can say anything that you want, how can it be holy, divine, revealed, inspired, or any of the other various adjectives I've heard in the past?

It's not really all that difficult a concept to grasp, unless growing in wisdom and knowledge is somehow foreign to you.

Biblical literalists ARE on firmer theological ground than other types of Christians, for the simple fact that they follow the book from which their chosen God originated.

And that opinion is as theologically ignorant as those of fundamentalists and other religious extremists.

As for the claim of 'supporting these fundy nutjobs' pissing you off: Tough. You ARE supporting them by using their label.

Now you're just getting silly. This "all or nothing" mentality is not only illogical, but intellectually dishonest.

And since 'Christianity' can apparently mean whatever its adherents want it to mean, I think it's high time you and your non-psycho friends pick a label that doesn't automatically paint you the exact same shade as Pat Roberson.

I'm sure us "non-true Christians" will take your words under advisement. asked what gives me the right?

You see, I'm a theologian.

It's what I've studied, it's what my degree is in. Theology is one of my life's passions.

So, what gives YOU the right?

You see, I'm a Theologian. Went to school and graduated with a degree in theology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -On Biblical literalism Sal316  Oct-29-09 04:18 PM   #0 
  - boy, that's a lot of generalization and stereotyping of how Atheists think  wtbymark   Oct-29-09 04:29 PM   #1 
  - Read the threads here...  Sal316   Oct-29-09 04:32 PM   #2 
  - If there's a "deeper understanding" behind religious texts, I've yet to hear it.  stopbush   Oct-29-09 04:33 PM   #3 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Oct-29-09 10:38 PM   #25 
  - If I were to venture a guess.  gooey   Nov-02-09 04:04 AM   #179 
  - Cute, Sir, But No Cigar....  The Magistrate   Oct-29-09 04:49 PM   #4 
  - Scalia and Thomas would agree with you.  rug   Oct-29-09 06:56 PM   #7 
  - Exactly! +10  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 07:10 PM   #9 
  - If that's what you got from what I said.  Sal316   Oct-29-09 08:30 PM   #11 
  - Oh, it's all three AT ONCE, is it?  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 08:32 PM   #12 
  - My Simplicity Of Mind, Sir, Is Legend....  The Magistrate   Oct-29-09 09:44 PM   #16 
     - To the contrary, centuries of biblical scholarship has attempted to ferret out the meaning  rug   Oct-29-09 10:04 PM   #19 
        - Let Us Not Mix Apples And Oranges, Sir  The Magistrate   Oct-29-09 10:26 PM   #21 
           - What you have determined is that the book has no theological value and, by extension,  rug   Oct-29-09 10:34 PM   #23 
              - That's not what he said at all.  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 10:36 PM   #24 
              - Trust me, the Magistrate has little need for your advocacy, Meg.  rug   Oct-29-09 10:48 PM   #27 
                 - True,  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 10:50 PM   #29 
                    - Actually, it is.  rug   Oct-29-09 10:53 PM   #31 
                       - Aww,  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 10:54 PM   #32 
                          - I don't know how old you are but I do know how tedious you are. That is sufficient.  rug   Oct-29-09 11:06 PM   #34 
                             - mmmhmm,  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 11:12 PM   #35 
                                - Bye, Orly.  rug   Oct-29-09 11:18 PM   #36 
              - That Theology Has No Value, Sir, Is Axiomatic  The Magistrate   Oct-29-09 10:50 PM   #28 
                 - Now you have moved to the fruit stand.  rug   Oct-29-09 11:04 PM   #33 
                    - One Must Accept, Sir, That The Divine Exists, And Can Be Known, To Engage In Theology  The Magistrate   Oct-29-09 11:32 PM   #37 
                       - If God cannot be known or demonstrated then it cannot be the conclusion of an inquiry.  rug   Oct-30-09 12:00 AM   #38 
                          - Christian Theologians, Sir, Will say That On Occasion, But It Is Only Lip Service  The Magistrate   Oct-30-09 12:18 AM   #39 
                             - There is not a single theologian who holds that God can be comprehended fully.  rug   Oct-30-09 08:27 AM   #44 
                                - "The likeness is far greater than the difference."  trotsky   Oct-30-09 02:25 PM   #64 
                                   - Perhaps I could.  rug   Oct-30-09 06:08 PM   #90 
                                      - I'm surprised you managed to spell intellectual prowess,  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 06:54 PM   #101 
                                      - You know, darkstar, given you've stopped so many, I'm glad that adage is true.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:00 PM   #107 
                                         - Again your attempted insult makes no sense. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:02 PM   #108 
                                            - It is truly difficult to insult a dolt and have the dolt realize it.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:06 PM   #112 
                                               - Especially when you can't use proper sentence structure. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:14 PM   #118 
                                               - Hmmm, that clause looks rather forlorn.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:15 PM   #121 
                                               - A concept with which you must be intimately familiar,  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:16 PM   #123 
                                               - I know. My five children won't give me any of their time.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:19 PM   #128 
                                               - If I believed you had spawned, I wouldn't blame them.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:21 PM   #130 
                                               - A subject on which you must have vast experience.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:22 PM   #131 
                                               - As a matter of fact,  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:23 PM   #134 
                                               - Lol, you discuss dental surgery with friends who love to discuss dental surgery?  rug   Oct-30-09 07:28 PM   #139 
                                               - What's clear?  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:31 PM   #143 
                                               - For one thing, your writing style.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:36 PM   #149 
                                               - That's just those under-used neurons  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:38 PM   #152 
                                               - Just take care of those under-used neurons, you'll likely need every last one of them.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:51 PM   #157 
                                      - The king of the lame one-liners gets upset when someone does it to him?  trotsky   Oct-30-09 07:26 PM   #136 
                                         - As always, the bullies can dish out, but they can't take any of their own medicine.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:28 PM   #138 
                                         - Yup.  trotsky   Oct-30-09 07:32 PM   #144 
                                            - .  rug   Oct-30-09 07:33 PM   #146 
                                               - And once again, the atheist's questions are far too difficult for the believer.  trotsky   Oct-30-09 07:37 PM   #150 
                                               - Oh, but check #142.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:40 PM   #153 
                                               - Yes, you insight is too original and devastating for deluded stupid believers.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:44 PM   #154 
                                         - I'll spare you the couple of days.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:31 PM   #142 
  - I would shoot a bit wider.  rrneck   Oct-29-09 09:50 PM   #17 
     - A Reasonable View, Sir  The Magistrate   Oct-29-09 09:59 PM   #18 
        - True indeed.  rrneck   Oct-29-09 10:10 PM   #20 
  - And where exactly does this "deeper understanding" come from?  skepticscott   Oct-29-09 05:28 PM   #5 
  - The religionists are just flailing at this point.  stopbush   Oct-29-09 06:37 PM   #6 
  - Point well made.  rug   Oct-29-09 06:57 PM   #8 
  - What gives you the right,  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 07:44 PM   #10 
  - You start off with the wrong premise...  Sal316   Oct-29-09 10:32 PM   #22 
  - Ad hom,  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 10:38 PM   #26 
  - I honestly don't understand the charge that the liberal religious enable literalists  Meshuga   Oct-30-09 07:59 AM   #43 
     - What's not to understand?  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 08:58 AM   #45 
        - It is not a matter of reclaiming anything  Meshuga   Oct-30-09 10:02 AM   #46 
           - ...  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 10:35 AM   #48 
              - The only way to know what a liberal Christian is about is by getting to know them  Meshuga   Oct-30-09 11:37 AM   #50 
                 - If it is a poor explanation,  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 12:01 PM   #52 
                    - I think you make that point perfectly.  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 01:43 PM   #56 
                    - This may surprise you,  Leontius   Oct-30-09 01:55 PM   #58 
                       - So what?  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 02:09 PM   #62 
                       - And that is true in the places I have lived  Meshuga   Oct-30-09 03:21 PM   #72 
                          - Maybe we've both just been lucky  Leontius   Oct-30-09 03:49 PM   #78 
                    - The analogy does not insult me at all  Meshuga   Oct-30-09 03:01 PM   #68 
                       - .  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 03:24 PM   #74 
                          - Agree and disagree (about the flamesuit)  Meshuga   Oct-30-09 06:24 PM   #91 
  - Aw man, who turned over the rock you hide under?  trotsky   Oct-29-09 08:50 PM   #13 
  - Hmph,  darkstar3   Oct-29-09 09:08 PM   #14 
  - Don't get down on yourself, man.  trotsky   Oct-29-09 09:23 PM   #15 
  - You might want to unclench...  Sal316   Oct-29-09 10:52 PM   #30 
  - I missed that post.  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 01:17 AM   #40 
  - You won't get an answer  EvolveOrConvolve   Oct-30-09 01:06 PM   #53 
  - You're really not fooling anyone, you know.  trotsky   Oct-30-09 06:49 AM   #42 
  - SAL316, seriously, I would like to know.  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 01:47 PM   #57 
     - I'll try to answer best I can.  Sal316   Oct-30-09 03:16 PM   #71 
        - SAL, I appreciate your response, but I find it to be wrong.  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 03:30 PM   #75 
        - Thx for the reasonable debate...  Sal316   Oct-30-09 07:05 PM   #109 
           - Bu tyou did not answer my question.  rd_kent   Oct-31-09 10:49 AM   #173 
        - The claim you're making here  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 03:44 PM   #76 
        - Damn, you sure that hole is *only* Optimus Prime sized?  trotsky   Oct-30-09 04:40 PM   #82 
        - Thank you, again, trotsky.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 04:46 PM   #83 
        - No, that's not my claim.  Sal316   Oct-30-09 08:44 PM   #161 
           - 'Quite honestly, one wonders where you come up with these statements.'  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 10:17 PM   #164 
           - "Does that mean the average joe is incapable of understanding scripture?"  trotsky   Oct-31-09 08:56 AM   #170 
        - Re: Camel/ eye of the needle  stopbush   Oct-30-09 09:28 PM   #163 
  - So could you explain how  Leontius   Oct-30-09 01:34 PM   #55 
     - No, I can't explain how to address your strawman.  trotsky   Oct-30-09 01:59 PM   #60 
  - How do you determine which passages are literal and which are not?  laconicsax   Oct-30-09 02:31 AM   #41 
  - I asked the same question before I saw your post.  ZombieHorde   Oct-30-09 02:15 PM   #63 
     - It's been stirring in my mind as an OP for months.  laconicsax   Oct-30-09 03:24 PM   #73 
  - Do you consider this literal- what do these words mean exactly?  Amaya   Oct-30-09 10:12 AM   #47 
  - Read literally, sure it validates bigotry.  Sal316   Oct-30-09 03:44 PM   #77 
     - But don't you see, that YOUR interpretation? Why is YOURS right and anothers wrong?  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 03:51 PM   #79 
     - 'if one reads it properly'  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 03:59 PM   #81 
     - You Do Understand, Sir, What Low-Grade Stuff This Is You Are Peddling?  The Magistrate   Oct-30-09 05:09 PM   #85 
        - Context matters, sir.  Sal316   Oct-30-09 09:02 PM   #162 
           - Serious As a Heart Attack, Sir....  The Magistrate   Oct-30-09 11:39 PM   #166 
  - I've always found remarkable the claim  ChadwickHenryWard   Oct-30-09 11:06 AM   #49 
  - Atheists, by definition, do not believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 11:48 AM   #51 
  - Stupidity is relative.  rug   Oct-30-09 01:23 PM   #54 
     - Leave your family out of this. n/t  trotsky   Oct-30-09 02:03 PM   #61 
     - Oooh, don't hold back, tell us how you REALLY feel! n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 02:43 PM   #65 
     - As soon as I get out of your mother.  rug   Oct-30-09 06:02 PM   #88 
        - That doesn't even make sense!  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 06:43 PM   #93 
           - Are you responding to #88 or #61?  rug   Oct-30-09 06:49 PM   #97 
              - There's that lack of reading comprehension again. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 06:50 PM   #98 
                 - There's that lack of basic comprehension again.  rug   Oct-30-09 06:56 PM   #103 
                    - Aww, he doesn't know what 'comprehension' means, how precious... n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 06:58 PM   #105 
                       - Are you ever embarassed by what you post?  rug   Oct-30-09 07:07 PM   #113 
                          - I would ask you the same question, but I don't think you can feel shame. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:11 PM   #116 
                             - Maybe not, but I would be mortified to type "awww" as a form of sarcasm.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:14 PM   #119 
                                - I would be mortified to know anyone personally who used the phrase 'your mother' as an insult. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:17 PM   #125 
                                   - How do you feel about "Leave your family out of it?"  rug   Oct-30-09 07:20 PM   #129 
                                      - Sure it was insulting, but so was the post it was in reply to,  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:22 PM   #132 
                                         - Oh, the subthread itself began with an insult.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:26 PM   #137 
                                            - Perhaps,  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:30 PM   #141 
     - As evidenced by your post......stupidity ABOUNDS!  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 03:52 PM   #80 
     - Where's your evidence?  rug   Oct-30-09 06:04 PM   #89 
        - Are you THAT stupid? The stupidity is self evident.  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 06:37 PM   #92 
           - I require more proof than your assertion it is self-evident.  rug   Oct-30-09 06:43 PM   #94 
              - Only because your reading level is so low  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 06:45 PM   #95 
              - Oh there you are with those people in your head again.  rug   Oct-30-09 06:47 PM   #96 
                 - Deliberately stupid wordplay doesn't impress me.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 06:52 PM   #99 
                    - I doubt any wordplay impresses you.  rug   Oct-30-09 06:55 PM   #102 
                       - Something tells me that I'll be here long after you're gone. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 06:57 PM   #104 
                          - Are you sure it's not your own self-serving interpretation of what it is telling you?  rug   Oct-30-09 07:05 PM   #110 
                             - No, because what I'm referring to is your recent inflammatory and dickish history.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:11 PM   #114 
                                - Sorry to disabuse you, but replying to your inanities does not constutute history.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:12 PM   #117 
                                   - Ah, yes, because 'your mother' was a reply to me in any way.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:15 PM   #120 
                                      - Not to insult your reading comprehension, but that post was to another open minded poster.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:17 PM   #124 
                                         - You can't insult my reading comprehension when you don't understand what the phrase means.  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:19 PM   #127 
                                            - Oh? Resorting to caps? Tsk.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:23 PM   #133 
                                               - I only thought it might help get the point into that walnut inside your skull. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:24 PM   #135 
                                               - Thank you. It's been very difficult to follow.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:32 PM   #145 
                                               - Color me unsurprised. n/t  darkstar3   Oct-30-09 07:33 PM   #147 
              - The proof in in your posts....or the mirror....whichever you like.  rd_kent   Oct-31-09 10:38 AM   #171 
                 - I see. It's an opinion.  rug   Oct-31-09 10:42 AM   #172 
                    - Whatever, rug. It doesnt matter, as you pull the "rug" out from under your posts yourself.  rd_kent   Oct-31-09 10:54 AM   #174 
                       - Thank you for your thoughtful contribution.  rug   Oct-31-09 07:18 PM   #178 
     - Sometimes.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 06:52 PM   #100 
        - Sometimes  rug   Oct-30-09 06:58 PM   #106 
           - Do you disagree?  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 07:05 PM   #111 
              - I do.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:11 PM   #115 
                 - Of course I don't.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 07:16 PM   #122 
                    - Therefore, the bible is not asserting as literal truth that the number of pi is 3.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:18 PM   #126 
                       - Oh, it is.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 07:29 PM   #140 
                          - Didn't say it was infallible on math.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:35 PM   #148 
                             - Explain the execution for gays part.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 07:38 PM   #151 
                                - Answer my question first.  rug   Oct-30-09 07:46 PM   #155 
                                   - Why is it meant to be read literally?  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 07:47 PM   #156 
                                      - Your question was answered by another in #77.  rug   Oct-30-09 08:02 PM   #158 
                                         - No, it wasn't.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 08:11 PM   #159 
                                            - To be more precise, you believe in no God, Christian or otherwise.  rug   Oct-30-09 08:42 PM   #160 
                                               - I believe any scripture calling for the execution of gays to be stupid.  HiFructosePronSyrup   Oct-30-09 10:30 PM   #165 
                                                  - Does it?  rug   Oct-31-09 07:06 AM   #168 
  - How does one decide what to take as literal, and what to take as not literal?  ZombieHorde   Oct-30-09 01:56 PM   #59 
  - Try reading Origen he explains the exegetical process in I think his work  Leontius   Oct-30-09 02:58 PM   #67 
     - If you read Origen, you should be able to tell me, if you can not tell me after reading it,  ZombieHorde   Oct-30-09 03:13 PM   #70 
        - Everybody wants the Cliff Notes, nobody ever wants to read the damn book  Leontius   Oct-30-09 04:55 PM   #84 
           - I think the point is..why does one have to read book B to understand book A?  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 05:22 PM   #86 
           - I am a full time collage student with two kids. I don't have time to read non school books.  ZombieHorde   Oct-30-09 05:25 PM   #87 
              - Understand time constraints in such a situation  Leontius   Oct-31-09 07:24 AM   #169 
                 - Its only "christian babble" if thats what you make it.  rd_kent   Oct-31-09 01:19 PM   #176 
                 - I will consider your post, but I can not promise to agree with it.  ZombieHorde   Oct-31-09 05:14 PM   #177 
  - SAL316, this is directed right at you. A non-response will be taken as assurance I am correct.  rd_kent   Oct-30-09 02:52 PM   #66 
  - A direct answer? Hah!  Silent3   Oct-30-09 03:12 PM   #69 
  - Nov 2, 2009, 1554hrs ... I even missed "trick-or-treating" just waiting for an answer.  Lost-in-FL   Nov-02-09 02:54 PM   #182 
  - : popcorn :  GrilledCheeses   Oct-31-09 12:01 AM   #167 
  - So, we shouldn't take as literal that Jesus was the son of god, that he died  stopbush   Oct-31-09 01:10 PM   #175 
  - Science and God cannot be compared.  gooey   Nov-02-09 04:10 AM   #180 
     - Science is not an explanation of the effect.  darkstar3   Nov-02-09 11:09 AM   #181 
     - I'll concede to that.  gooey   Nov-02-09 08:24 PM   #184 
        - Yeah, that sounds a lot like NOM.  darkstar3   Nov-02-09 08:27 PM   #185 
           - I read that whole article and he never explained what  gooey   Nov-03-09 02:46 AM   #186 
              - you say potato...n/t  darkstar3   Nov-03-09 02:17 PM   #187 
     - Religion consistently gets it wrong then makes excuses.  laconicsax   Nov-02-09 03:18 PM   #183 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC