2007-06-04 13:56:30 · 23 answers · asked by Stew 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Of all thought. Are you sure they will understand the word bereft?
2007-06-04 13:59:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I think the question is poor, but...
Original thought is not really necessary. If you find something you really believe in, do you dismiss it because you didn't necessarily come up with it yourself?
On the other hand, over-quoting is often a symptom of a lack of original thought, though it does not directly imply such. People who quote scripture are at a major disadvantage because they cannot prove scripture is true - therefore they seem brainwashed because they spout out words without basis. Unfortunately, people do this all the time in other cases as well.
To those of you who say that it's the same for science, you should be careful. Science and reason are the best ways we have of understanding things on Earth. Quoting information from scientific texts is not an indication of a lack of original thought, but mostly just an attempt to convey widely accepted information.
2007-06-04 14:10:29 · answer #2 · answered by Skye 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
--WHATS MORE important being original or being truthful?
--WAS JESUS , his teaching, & his actions original? What do the historians say?
*** gt The Greatest Man Who Ever Lived
The historian H. G. Wells said that a man’s greatness can be measured by ‘what he leaves to grow, and whether he started others to think along fresh lines with a vigor that persisted after him.’ Wells, although not claiming to be a Christian, acknowledged: “By this test Jesus stands first.”
--NOT ONLY was he unique , but he always was truthful and acted in all goodness!
***A Historical Person
--Yet, strangely, some say that Jesus never lived—that he is, in effect, a creation of some first-century men. Answering such skeptics, the respected historian Will Durant argued: “That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so lofty an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospels.”
--WHAT DID HE always do in refuting, teaching , reproving?
***WAS IT not his use of Scripture , accurately?-- THAT IS what true Christians try to do accurately--because he indeed set that example!
--WAS NOT HITLER original in his atrocities?
--HIS Volkswagon was original & so were his concentration camps , were they not?
--ONCE AGAIN what is more important being TRUTHFUL and trying to live that way --with the Scriptures OR being an original with narcisstic qualities?
2007-06-04 15:15:11 · answer #3 · answered by THA 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Occasionally, just as people who quote anything tend to use it as an excuse for a lack of original thought. As for scripture specifically, there is a bunch of intellectual critical study.
2007-06-04 13:59:55 · answer #4 · answered by shadyshinobi 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'm glad you aren't a physician as you are liable to confound symptoms with causes. Some scripture quoters (me for example) are able to think independently of the bible, and interestingly enough, the opponents of scripture sometimes quote it!
Would you lump the author(s) of the Skeptics Annotated Bible in with those who don't think original thoughts?
My guess is that you wouldn't, but I certainly would. In fact, there are any number of atheists on this site who don't seem to know how to deal with scripture without it...
2007-06-04 14:02:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
It depends, a well chosen and appropriate quote (preferably short and concise) may enhance an answer and relate it better to the question, however wholesale cutting and pasting of massive sections of the Bible gives the appearance of being lacking in original thought.
2007-06-04 14:03:35 · answer #6 · answered by Taliesin Pen Beirdd 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No more than a person who quotes Shakespeare. Resorting to a text that has character or beauty would not see anyone condemned if it were secular. Why is it necessarily so merely for being a religious text?
Someone who smartly quotes an obscure biblical passage in a relevant discussion certainly strikes me as perhaps even more original than someone who copy/pastes in the "if God made a rock..." puzzle for the eighth billionth time.
2007-06-04 14:00:14 · answer #7 · answered by evolver 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
What a silly thing to say. That's like telling a child doing a book report not to report on the book he just read. People who know and understand the scriptures should be applauded, they're RARE.
2007-06-04 14:19:52 · answer #8 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. Sometimes those of the other persuasion (atheists) say the same things again and again. Are they bereft of original thought?
2007-06-04 13:59:00 · answer #9 · answered by . 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Are people how quote Richard Dawkins, Mark Twain, or any other author, devoid of any original thought?
What about paraphrases?
Go troll somewhere else.
2007-06-04 14:00:23 · answer #10 · answered by Randy G 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋