You Make Me Sick

That's Catholics. They're on the list.

Being Catholic automatically makes you a child molester now?

Yes

"Being Catholic automatically makes you a child molester now?"

No. Just being one of those hypocrite extremists in the picture.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/ ...

Specific enough?

Blind hatred doesn't make either side better.

And that's why there's little point in arguing untestable claims. It always ends up as "But when they said 1 they didn't really MEAN 1".

@masterm1nd

Which makes it, to many, seem worthless. If there's no concrete meaning to it, and no way to tell if you've got it right, then what's the point in having it at all? With science, if something's up for interpretation one can easily create an experiment to falsify one or the other. But here, we're left with the only method of determining the correct interpretation being to tell someone "Yah, well, that's YOUR opinion....man." and then seeing who backs down first.

The thing about the bible is that you can take from it what you want, from what parts you want. No one is trying to make you accept all of it at face value, except these people, who are really just a loud minority.

They seem to have conveniently left out several on that tektonics site. I had to see how they'd possibly explain this one, but it's not there.

"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." (Gen 22:1)

"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." (James 1:13)

You obviously don't get the concept of the bible and faith in general then. Quite naive to think science isn't also victim to interpretation....

I'll give you an example since you don't think science contradicts itself. Matter can not be created nor destroyed. Yet that's not possible because it got here somehow. Which makes it, to many, seem worthless. If there's no concrete meaning to it, and no way to tell if you've got it right, then what's the point in having it at all? Take a look at global warming and tell me again science isn't open to interpretation. What I originally said applies to everything. You guys are pretty unreasonable to bury it being simple fact. There is an absolute truth regarding science, faith, and everything else. None of us can actually see this absolute truth in it;s absoluteness, we only see what our own unique perspective allows us to see. Everything looks different from a different angle. Ohh, and until science proves there is no greater being, not all faith is mutually exclusive with science. The more you know....

@masterm1nd

Yes, that's the point. Scientific findings can be up for interpretation. So each person with a different interpretation then creates a way to falsify the conflicting opinion. Then you can determine which is true or false. Person A says gravity works in one way, Person B says it works in another. Both basing their opinion on the available experimental evidence. So they devise an experiment to prove one, and the results can then be used as a more firm basis to go from. When this happens in a biblical context, the only option is both people yelling at each other. Because there's no way to test which interpretation is correct. And because anyone can pull out the "Well, that's just a metaphor" card.

I'm not saying religion is bad, just that it's pointless to use holy texts to argue anything but ones own subjective stance on an issue and only to oneself as an audience due to the fact that 'everything' in almost any holy text of any religion can be reinterpreted to say whatever the reader wants.

As for faith, belief with only subjective or anecdotal evidence?