Religion

trotsky

(49,533 posts)

43. Thanks for the admission.

Reply to stone space (Reply #42)

Mon Oct 10, 2016, 03:28 PM

Oct 2016

Have a great day.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

58 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fill in the blank [View all] Cartoonist Oct 2016 OP

Come now - there's an easy algorithm for this... whatthehey Oct 2016 #1

That sums it up pretty well. n/t trotsky Oct 2016 #4

The right half of that chart is interesting. stone space Oct 2016 #23

What's the rule? trotsky Oct 2016 #28

Huh? What rule? I merely observed that the right half of that chart was invalid. stone space Oct 2016 #34

Answer the question. trotsky Oct 2016 #40

I don't know anything about your rules, except that you appear obsessed with them. stone space Oct 2016 #42

Thanks for the admission. trotsky Oct 2016 #43

What "admission"? stone space Oct 2016 #44

Out of curiousity, opiate69 Oct 2016 #53

The state protects its monopoly on violence. rug Oct 2016 #54

Great diagram. Got a link? Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #18

Isaiah 2:4 should be taken literally. stone space Oct 2016 #2

Someone's going to judge between nations? trotsky Oct 2016 #5

Quelle horreur! struggle4progress Oct 2016 #10

That's not the point of the discussion. Goblinmonger Oct 2016 #12

The discussion may have no point, other than to spin in well-worn circles struggle4progress Oct 2016 #15

So is religion the wolf? Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #19

The question was asked in the religion forum on a Democratic board. stone space Oct 2016 #22

Seems that the point of the OP is lost on you Goblinmonger Oct 2016 #27

Huh? Did the OP have a point? I just answered a question. stone space Oct 2016 #39

So your argument would be, then, that warring parts of the Bible shouldn't be taken literally. Goblinmonger Oct 2016 #11

If I tell you that I believe in the 1st Amendment's guarentee of Freedom of Religion, will you... stone space Oct 2016 #20

What does it mean to "guarantee" the freedom of religion? trotsky Oct 2016 #29

Fallacy. Wednesdays Oct 2016 #3

So tell us how to tell the difference, with examples please whatthehey Oct 2016 #6

I gave an example in post #2. stone space Oct 2016 #24

No, the challenge here is to explain why certain parts SHOULD be taken literally... trotsky Oct 2016 #7

What "rule" is required to believe that swords should be beaten into plowshares? stone space Oct 2016 #21

See post #28. n/t trotsky Oct 2016 #30

Why? Post #28 has nothing to do with this post. stone space Oct 2016 #37

Who has ever claimed that... NeoGreen Oct 2016 #8

What a dull discussion topic for a progressive board! struggle4progress Oct 2016 #9

You've said 100 times religion doesn't cause violence Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #13

I do sometimes wonder if trolls have a special tendency to put words in the mouths of others struggle4progress Oct 2016 #14

Feel free to clarify what you said earlier, 100 times Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #17

This makes believers heads explode. cleanhippie Oct 2016 #16

Actually, I haven't seen any evidence of that here. stone space Oct 2016 #25

"...anything..." Iggo Oct 2016 #26

Do you think this should be taken literally? rug Oct 2016 #31

So thou, Rug, can easily differentiate? Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #32

Yes, along with most of the world. rug Oct 2016 #33

Test: literal or metaphorical? Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #35

1) M rug Oct 2016 #36

The Church told us? But the other churches say different Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #38

Not quite. rug Oct 2016 #41

Churches define what's metaphorical Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #45

I fear that view will leave you confused about anything outside the periodic table. rug Oct 2016 #46

So Christianity is radically uncertain. Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #47

Without a doubt. rug Oct 2016 #48

Except the Periodic Table Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #49

. rug Oct 2016 #50

All things are questionable. But? Brettongarcia Oct 2016 #51

I put religion squarely in the middle of what is questionable. rug Oct 2016 #52

so honesty is not important... uriel1972 Oct 2016 #55

They are quite important. Irrational inferences, however, are not. rug Oct 2016 #56

I quote... uriel1972 Oct 2016 #57

It says nothing about either deception or honesty. That is the irrational inference. rug Oct 2016 #58