Religion

trotsky

(49,533 posts)

32. "no scriptural or historical support"

Wed May 29, 2019, 02:28 PM

May 2019

Actually it's got quite a bit of both.

But you get to classify your beliefs as "fact," and theirs as fiction. Just as they do to yours, oddly enough.

"Render unto Caesar that which is Casear's" is their basis for saying that the government shouldn't be involved in charity/healthcare/etc. You realize they really do have biblical backing for most of their beliefs, right? You certainly don't agree with their interpretation, but can you really declare them WRONG? Do you allow for the possibility that you might be the one who is wrong?

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hello, Religion Group members. [View all] Kind of Blue May 2019 OP

The whole "pro-life" thing is nothing more than a false moral construct Major Nikon May 2019 #1

Thanks for that. I'm assuming the RCC is the Roman Catholic Church. Kind of Blue May 2019 #5

"The sanctity of life" has fck-all to do with it. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2019 #2

Good questions and the ones I'm hoping we don't Kind of Blue May 2019 #6

Thanks for sharing that here. MineralMan May 2019 #3

Yeah, they are a godsend... lol Kind of Blue May 2019 #8

You're assuming the Religious Right read their Bibles for guidance. Girard442 May 2019 #4

They claim to. Really, though, they MineralMan May 2019 #7

Sorry but many can quote whole sections Voltaire2 May 2019 #10

There's a big, big difference between parroting cherry-picked verses... Girard442 May 2019 #11

They comprehend it their way. Voltaire2 May 2019 #13

If you say so. Girard442 May 2019 #15

Well it's a damn good thing you've figured out exactly what the bible means. trotsky May 2019 #22

And we see many such cherry picked arguments here. guillaumeb May 2019 #24

Yours is a mistaken assumption. Kind of Blue May 2019 #12

There are no "scriptural truths". All of the texts Voltaire2 May 2019 #9

Agreed but that's not the point of the OP. Kind of Blue May 2019 #14

I don't read the old testament often - just glance through it ocasionly. Too much killing and wars. demosincebirth May 2019 #16

Agreed, demosincebirth. Kind of Blue May 2019 #18

For every written truth... safeinOhio May 2019 #17

So true, safeinOhio. Kind of Blue May 2019 #19

Always point out the Red Letter Bible safeinOhio May 2019 #20

Exactly but I prefer Kind of Blue May 2019 #25

If God wants a say in our legislative process... Act_of_Reparation May 2019 #21

LOL... I hear you, Act_of_Reparation. Kind of Blue May 2019 #26

It'd be nice if all Christians could agree on one interpretation of the bible, yes. trotsky May 2019 #23

Why don't you address the OP? Kind of Blue May 2019 #27

I think their point is... uriel1972 May 2019 #28

Thanks, uriel1972. Safely ignored metaphors are Kind of Blue May 2019 #31

Who decides what's metaphor and what isn't? trotsky May 2019 #33

See Post 34. n/t Kind of Blue May 2019 #35

So everyone decides for themselves, right? trotsky May 2019 #37

Too true... uriel1972 May 2019 #38

"so how can we say with any confidence what it was supposed to have meant" trotsky May 2019 #39

Bingo. Act_of_Reparation May 2019 #40

In the OP, you claim to have a definitive interpretation of what the bible says. trotsky May 2019 #29

The point of the OP is that the Christian nationalist Kind of Blue May 2019 #30

"no scriptural or historical support" trotsky May 2019 #32

"Actually it's got quite a bit of both." Kind of Blue May 2019 #34

You want a cite? Fine. trotsky May 2019 #36