Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Adulteress story: Accept further evidence, but not Andy's argument or edit comment.
Line 28: Line 28:     
:: Right.  There's no denying how this passage is used to deny the existence of [[Hell]] (which, by the way, should be capitalized), oppose capital punishment, and even bully anyone who condemns sin in an effective way.  There is already one reference to an example and more could be easily found.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:46, 9 December 2008 (EST)
 
:: Right.  There's no denying how this passage is used to deny the existence of [[Hell]] (which, by the way, should be capitalized), oppose capital punishment, and even bully anyone who condemns sin in an effective way.  There is already one reference to an example and more could be easily found.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:46, 9 December 2008 (EST)
−
::::I'm going to half-agree with Andy here:  I have heard people (ministers included) reference this story as an argument against capital punishment, and/or to downplay the notion of harsh punishments from God.  However, I must take issue with the idea that the story's "authenticity is rejected by modern biblical scholars".  While some reject it entirely, and most dispute its placement, my understanding is that it is considered to be an actual Jesus story, and the implication that all scholars reject it out of hand is preposterous.  At the ''very'' least, there should be a "some" inserted between "by" and "modern".--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 14:10, 9 December 2008 (EST)
+
:::I'm going to half-agree with Andy here:  I have heard people (ministers included) reference this story as an argument against capital punishment, and/or to downplay the notion of harsh punishments from God.  However, I must take issue with the idea that the story's "authenticity is rejected by modern biblical scholars".  While some reject it entirely, and most dispute its placement, my understanding is that it is considered to be an actual Jesus story, and the implication that all scholars reject it out of hand is preposterous.  At the ''very'' least, there should be a "some" inserted between "by" and "modern".--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 14:10, 9 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::: Given that there's now further testimony of the passage being used to oppose hell and capital punishment, I'll accept that.  However, not all the objections have been addressed.
 +
:::: Further, Andy's edit comment and reply here are offensive, illogical, and unsubstantiated.  As I have repeatedly pointed out before, it is NOT censorship to remove inaccurate information (which is what I believed this to be).  Further, it is NOT a valid argument to simply declare yourself correct ("There's no denying...").
 +
:::: Finally, there was no explanation for the reversion of a wording change that was made at the same time.
 +
:::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:12, 9 December 2008 (EST)
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu