Do religious people ACTUALLY believe in their books?

[Coriolis]

So you claim you feel an elephant.
You're still basically just making an argument that a higher quantity of data equates to a higher quality of data which is still fallacious.

No. A higher quantity of data, covering a broader range of parameters, equates to a higher quality conclusion.

I never understood people who claimed to want to understand God, or even Jesus, better but then rejected out of hand information about the same. That's just another flavor of willful ignorance. It truly is blind belief. At least the blind men were doing their best to rely on their other senses, and eventually on each other's experiences.

 

[Beorn]

No. A higher quantity of data, covering a broader range of parameters, equates to a higher quality conclusion.

Where do the parameters come from???
Mustn't they be presupposed?
So aren't you still just being circular?

I never understood people who claimed to want to understand God, or even Jesus, better but then rejected out of hand information about the same.

Again, you're presupposing what is and isn't information about God and Jesus and judging others based on your own determinations.

 

[Coriolis]

Where do the parameters come from???
Mustn't they be presupposed?
So aren't you still just being circular?

Again, you're presupposing what is and isn't information about God and Jesus and judging others based on your own determinations.

How do you determine what is and isn't about God? Where do you get the parameters? Too many religious people simply dismiss any information that does not agree with their own preconceptions. Again, willful ignorance.

If you are unable to determine the content of a text by reading it, something is lacking in your literacy education.
If you cannot determine relevant parameters from the subject of study itself, then you never learned how to learn.

I prefer to rely on primary source material, where at all possible. An elephant is not a bad start.

 

[chubber]

And there are men out there who groom young girls to accept the same willingly when they pass the age of statutory rape. Not everything that exists should.

Are you trying to say something related to Bride Kidnapping?

 

[Coriolis]

Are you trying to say something related to Bride Kidnapping?

No, rather sexual predators. This happened to a friend's daughter not long ago. Your mention of the role of chains in some relationships called it to mind. Here it was not marriage (he was already married) but a D/s relationship in which his wife was complicit.

 

[chubber]

No, rather sexual predators. This happened to a friend's daughter not long ago. Your mention of the role of chains in some relationships called it to mind. Here it was not marriage (he was already married) but a D/s relationship in which his wife was complicit.

Maybe they will turn it into some kind of tradition, a couple of centuries later, by "pretending to be groomed" or something similar.

 

[Coriolis]

Maybe they will turn it into some kind of tradition, a couple of centuries later, by "pretending to be groomed" or something similar.

Dragging and coercing children into relationships is the sort of tradition best left behind us. We are, I hope, developing better traditions of letting them grow up first; of expecting relationships to be adult and consensual; and of raising children to confide in trustworthy adults when pressured by inappropriate sexual advances. (The fellow in question here, by the way, is now serving a nice stint in jail.)