277
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3:
Line 3: + +
Talk:Debate:Grave errors/inconsistencies in the Bible make literal translation worthless. (view source)
Revision as of 02:50, December 2, 2007
, 02:50, December 2, 2007→Hatred of Judeo-Christianity
:Given the fact that Judeo-Christianity has such a prominent position within Western society and that there is often conflict arising from literal interpretations of the Bible (evolution vs. creation to name one) this is an entirely appropriate debate to have, furthered by the unique nature of Christianity compared to other religions. If there was cause to debate the literal translation of the Quran (if a suicide bomber stated it was the motivation for his actions) then this too should be carried out, however given the vast differences betweent the Bible and the Quran these debates cannot be joined together. As for the arguments of either side, it is better to refute them by exploring their claims and considering where they are wrong rather than making unsubstantiated personal attacks, as the latter is a sign of [[Essay:Liberal_Style|liberal deceit]] [[User:EQ|EQ]] 10:31, 16 August 2007 (EDT)
:Given the fact that Judeo-Christianity has such a prominent position within Western society and that there is often conflict arising from literal interpretations of the Bible (evolution vs. creation to name one) this is an entirely appropriate debate to have, furthered by the unique nature of Christianity compared to other religions. If there was cause to debate the literal translation of the Quran (if a suicide bomber stated it was the motivation for his actions) then this too should be carried out, however given the vast differences betweent the Bible and the Quran these debates cannot be joined together. As for the arguments of either side, it is better to refute them by exploring their claims and considering where they are wrong rather than making unsubstantiated personal attacks, as the latter is a sign of [[Essay:Liberal_Style|liberal deceit]] [[User:EQ|EQ]] 10:31, 16 August 2007 (EDT)
::Or the fact that the Humanist Religion has the most prominent position in the commanding heights of Western society and that it creates conflict from literal interpretations of its several documented manifestos (evolution being the only accepted theory presented at all levels of state sponsored schools). The literal interpretation and implementation of the Humanist manifestos whose end result would be the realization of George Orwell's book 1984. The already documented failures of these would lead us to refute its claims as wrong after considering the facts. But this would lead many to take this as merely unsubstantiated personal attacks on their non-theist religious beliefs. Which you may note some examples here already.Would that clarify some positions here?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 21:50, 1 December 2007 (EST)