Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(147,606 posts)
38. Acceptable at the moment, I think.
Wed Dec 12, 2018, 04:25 PM
Dec 2018

Or for the purposes of the immediate position taken, anyhow...

Basically TlalocW Dec 2018 #1
And that happens. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #2
We may argue about intent, but nobody argues that the parts we don't like are metaphorical marylandblue Dec 2018 #97
Yes, they actually do argue just that. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #99
Prefatory is not the same as metaphorical marylandblue Dec 2018 #100
The intent is the same. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #101
So you are admitting that the intent of a metaphorical reading marylandblue Dec 2018 #102
"When it agrees with whatever you think. " mitch96 Dec 2018 #35
So, it means exactly what one thinks it means MineralMan Dec 2018 #3
And you feel differently? guillaumeb Dec 2018 #7
You were raised in a literalist tradition. trotsky Dec 2018 #17
You know nothing of how I was raised. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #26
You yourself said you were raised in the RCC. trotsky Dec 2018 #34
OK. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #41
It's a statement YOU made in the post starting this thread, g. trotsky Dec 2018 #61
Again: guillaumeb Dec 2018 #74
I've read them. trotsky Dec 2018 #86
You obviously created your own definition, and your own argument. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #87
I think he is using your implied definition marylandblue Dec 2018 #88
But he states that I am a literalist in spite of my many posts, guillaumeb Dec 2018 #89
You've often accused atheists of being literalists, despite their protestations marylandblue Dec 2018 #90
I have accused SOME. Not all. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #91
His point is the same whether it is some or all marylandblue Dec 2018 #92
But you are. You take much of the Christian bible literally. trotsky Dec 2018 #94
I understand your position. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #95
Then offer up an argument as to why I'm wrong. trotsky Dec 2018 #96
It is useless to do so. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #98
Why? trotsky Dec 2018 #104
Not at all. eom guillaumeb Dec 2018 #105
Then offer up an argument as to why I'm wrong. trotsky Dec 2018 #106
Your reply validates my earlier response. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #107
Still no response, because you can't provide one. trotsky Dec 2018 #108
It's an unresolved issue based on a question you've never answered. trotsky Dec 2018 #93
He didn't mean that literally. Voltaire2 Dec 2018 #56
... trotsky Dec 2018 #60
I feel differently, yes. MineralMan Dec 2018 #20
One can read the Bible as literal story. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #27
I don't know of any atheists who read the Bible MineralMan Dec 2018 #31
I understand. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #32
Oh, I recognize your objective here... MineralMan Dec 2018 #37
And I yours. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #43
A dissertation would not be appropriate for DU marylandblue Dec 2018 #44
Believe me, nobody wants a dissertation. MineralMan Dec 2018 #64
It would go such a long way toward ACTUAL dialog in this forum... trotsky Dec 2018 #65
I asked him once, but he punted. MineralMan Dec 2018 #67
He's playing a game that believers who fancy themselves quite intelligent often do. trotsky Dec 2018 #68
I see it a little differently. MineralMan Dec 2018 #69
I think you are right marylandblue Dec 2018 #72
There's a logical progression. Some go through the steps quickly MineralMan Dec 2018 #73
Nah. It's just random splatter from rns. Voltaire2 Dec 2018 #84
For some, that kind of random sampling MineralMan Dec 2018 #85
Define "valid". Act_of_Reparation Dec 2018 #4
It means that the person in question agrees with it. MineralMan Dec 2018 #5
What I wrote: guillaumeb Dec 2018 #9
I am not asking you to repeat yourself. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2018 #14
Allow me. trotsky Dec 2018 #16
I intertepret "valid" differently marylandblue Dec 2018 #19
Acceptable at the moment, I think. MineralMan Dec 2018 #38
Meaningful discussion requires both sides to answer relevant questions Major Nikon Dec 2018 #22
The term was defined in the sentences. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #25
Perhaps your sentences didn't do an adequate job defining the term. trotsky Dec 2018 #36
Perhaps not. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #42
Or perhaps I did and they aren't the be-all, end-all "silence everyone who disagrees with me"... trotsky Dec 2018 #59
I am too stupid to decipher meaning from your prose. Act_of_Reparation Dec 2018 #52
The RCC may not have an authoritative interpretation for each verse, but marylandblue Dec 2018 #6
The Pope speaks on certain things. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #8
So what happens if you tell your priest his holy orders are worthless, marylandblue Dec 2018 #10
I would suggest that you ask a priest that question. eom guillaumeb Dec 2018 #24
The Pope is allowed to use Latin because he is the Pope marylandblue Dec 2018 #45
I use Latin, and I am not the Pope. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #46
Jesus spoke Aramaic and so you should too marylandblue Dec 2018 #48
If I were Jesus, guillaumeb Dec 2018 #49
Why is God edhopper Dec 2018 #11
Maybe that's just it. God isn't perfect. gtar100 Dec 2018 #13
As Epicurus said edhopper Dec 2018 #21
But we cannot know what the Creator is wiling to do. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #47
Then he is a proper wanker edhopper Dec 2018 #51
Sounds suspiciously like you made that all up. Complete fabrication. trotsky Dec 2018 #62
Well, not so, really. Here's what the French version of the MineralMan Dec 2018 #70
Your little dissertation has nothing to do guillaumeb Dec 2018 #75
No? Well, you see, I'm not constrained by your expectations. MineralMan Dec 2018 #77
No perfect being could possibly screw up as much Mariana Dec 2018 #50
Perhaps our human intelligence is not capable of discerning guillaumeb Dec 2018 #28
So it's up to us? edhopper Dec 2018 #33
I cannot answer for the Creator. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #40
So if a teacher cannot clearly explain concepts Voltaire2 Dec 2018 #57
An interesting theory. You certainly do like to think of your fellow human beings as stupid. trotsky Dec 2018 #63
Or, perhaps there is no such Creator, eh, which means MineralMan Dec 2018 #71
If a creator requires its creations to follow its instructions, but does not give them the capacity LongtimeAZDem Dec 2018 #76
There is another possibility, where there is no creator, but only MineralMan Dec 2018 #78
Which is why I expressed it as a conditional accepting the premise, so as not to leave open the LongtimeAZDem Dec 2018 #80
Good point. MineralMan Dec 2018 #81
That is interesting as I had not really heard what the RCC says about biblical interpretation. gtar100 Dec 2018 #12
Thank you for your answer. guillaumeb Dec 2018 #29
Every interpretation is valid. trotsky Dec 2018 #15
which is also to say every interpretation is invalid as well.... nt uriel1972 Dec 2018 #39
You got it! n/t trotsky Dec 2018 #58
Multiple meanings Cartoonist Dec 2018 #18
#s 1 and 2 of your response are contradictory. eom guillaumeb Dec 2018 #30
They aren't Lordquinton Dec 2018 #54
You mean like theism and deism? Major Nikon Dec 2018 #55
LOL. Classic gil. trotsky Dec 2018 #66
The modern church needs excuses on why it's no longer a good idea to murder disobedient children Major Nikon Dec 2018 #23
What makes it valid? Choose the interpretation that reads the way you want it to. There are many ver keithbvadu2 Dec 2018 #53
Just had this conversation with daughter woodsprite Dec 2018 #79
Greek. Voltaire2 Dec 2018 #83
Laughter? Ferrets are Cool Dec 2018 #82
If it comes from the Church of the Third Revelation... Buckeye_Democrat Dec 2018 #103
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»What constitutes a "valid...»Reply #38