Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Leisure and Society
Society
Regions of the World
UK and Ireland
Melvyn Bragg puts Richard Dawkins in his place!!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Nabobalis" data-source="post: 60137217"><p>You don't have to believe a book to discuss the source material - otherwise no one would ever analyze a book or play unless it was factual. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I reject the source as false, but you don't. That is important. People read the bible and can analyze your god who you accept. There is nothing illogical about this. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> Well the sensible answer is that the old testament was used/preached to strike fear into people and what else is more fearful? Getting killed by the people who's opinion/god you don't accept. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You claim it is real and that's besides the point. A genocide whether real or fake is nothing to be taken lightly. Even accepting a fake genocide is appalling. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, you don't have to accept the source material is true to analyse the text. Just ask anyone who does literature. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, you accept the bible and we can read the bible and analyse the characters in it. Accepting if the source is true or not doesn't change anything.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't know. I don't believe in any flying spaghetti monsters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Nabobalis, post: 60137217"] You don't have to believe a book to discuss the source material - otherwise no one would ever analyze a book or play unless it was factual. I reject the source as false, but you don't. That is important. People read the bible and can analyze your god who you accept. There is nothing illogical about this. Well the sensible answer is that the old testament was used/preached to strike fear into people and what else is more fearful? Getting killed by the people who's opinion/god you don't accept. You claim it is real and that's besides the point. A genocide whether real or fake is nothing to be taken lightly. Even accepting a fake genocide is appalling. Again, you don't have to accept the source material is true to analyse the text. Just ask anyone who does literature. Again, you accept the bible and we can read the bible and analyse the characters in it. Accepting if the source is true or not doesn't change anything. I don't know. I don't believe in any flying spaghetti monsters. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Leisure and Society
Society
Regions of the World
UK and Ireland
Melvyn Bragg puts Richard Dawkins in his place!!
Top
Bottom