Garrette, its like this you read the freakin' Bible and get what you get.
Just like readin Huck Finn.
So the bible has exactly the same spiritual authority as The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Thanks for answering that one.
Canadian Malcontent said:
No, I don't.
Canadian Malcontent said:
Fine by me.
Canadian Malcontent said:
Can you PROVE it aint true?
Prove
what isn't true, exactly?
I can point out numerous contradictions, including in the key events of christianity (like the resurrection). Does that prove them untrue? If not, which version do you say is true?
If it's not literally true, are you asking me to prove the untruth of allegory? I can try, but first you'd have to tell me what meanings to take from them, and since you've already said we take our own meanings from it, I don't see how you can do this.
Canadian Malcontent said:
I never said I didn't nor acted as if I don't.
Canadian Malcontent said:
as I respect you and yours.
Much obliged.
Canadian Malcontent said:
If you dont and try to proseletyse my chillun, then we got a argument.
How on earth could we have an argument if the meaning I take from scripture is that I am to proselytize non-belief? You've said I should take my own meaning from it.
And as has already been suggested, if you are to take this stance, then you should, to remain consistent, be against proselytizing in any form by any one of any religion. Are you?
Lastly on this point, don't think that we are proselytizing here. Debating on a skeptical forum is not the same as actively seeking converts, though that does occasionally happen here. Usually from the believer side, though, like say Kurious Kathy.
Canadian Malcontent said:
Advice; im gonna win the argument.,
What argument would that be? That your interpretation of scripture is correct?
Or are you saying you won't be swayed to non-belief by any of my (hypothetical) proselytizing?