1) The person who refuses to accept any evidence that their scripture may have flaws, even when the flaws are obvious?
or
2) The person who can accept the idea that there may be some flaws in their scripture, but who still believes in the overall message.
By "flaw" I mean
1) contradictions (e.g., Saul died in 4 different ways according to the bible, which is a neat trick http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/saul.html)
2) errors (e.g., according to the bible, a bat is a bird)
3) intolerance/bigotry (eg., the bible commands women to stay silent in church)
4) injustice (e.g., the penalty for being a disobedient child is death, according ot the bible)
etc.
Personally, I think that the second person demonstrates more faith because they believe enough in the message that they can handle acknowledging such things and having to slip into rationalization or denial to cover them up.
What do you think?
2006-08-31
02:31:45
·
28 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Religion & Spirituality