Jump to content

Do You Think There 'should' Be Certain 'rules'


Recommended Posts

Here's a reply to one post on another forum that got me thinking....

Regarding...

 

psalms 137:9 killing babies!

 

I'd like to see my fellow iconoclasts remove this one from their repertoire of complaints against Christianity, because while it's evokative, it's got to be taken out of context to be what we use it for. It's a lament about life in captivity. It can be used as an illustration of histrionic religiosity and drastic overstatement, but it's talking about how life in captivity was sooo horrible that you'd be happy to see babies killed, even violently, so they wouldn't have to go through it. It's bad writing and emotionally infantile perhaps, but it's clearly not saying that it's just fun or pleasing to kill babies. It makes iconoclasts look less than genuine, to put it mildly.

 

We've got far too many valid complaints to compromise the integrity of our position just for a little drama.

 

 

 

 

Me thinks anything goes - I question the 'rules' of conversation the christian/faithful follow?

 

A little drama....to use killing of babies to illustrate captivity...come on that is a very poor excuse or explaination. Next thing I'm going to read is that the bible was written in ancient times etc etc bla bla.... So why for art thou' is it being used today.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I don't know that I would say there are rules exactly, but I would avoid setting up a strawman or putting them in a position to scream out of context. If you just want horrible bible commandments there are plenty without twisting verses or going with the worst possible interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah...thanks Taph!

I luckily missed out on being too exposed to bibble school that most other kids had to endure (my old SDAist church was only new and just being to set up all the time Ihad to attend).......anyway...I thought it was about payback too Artur - thanks for the confidence boost!

 

I think the 'debate' was more about forum terrorialism (if you know what I mean)...rather than about biblical interpretations.

 

The site happens to be very loosly moderated - which is great really......but it also means that the posters themselves feel as if they are all 'moderator's'...and need to 'strut ' their stuff. Its very funny to observe.

 

What I'm trying to get a handle on thou'.....is the difference between 'literal' interpretations and the type used by 'liberal's'....the old metaphoric loop hole trick.

 

See what I mean.....that makes it impossible to grab hold of any kind of logic?

:thanks:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.