Why the "There are so many interpretations of the Bible" claim is confused

[Esquilax]

Well if you are interested in discussing why this is incorrect, I am happy to do so.  And if you think that my interpretation is incorrect, then let's discuss it from the source and not others interpretations.   However it seems that we Christians are at a loss, because you can pick any poor interpretation that fits your agenda, and then argue against that. 

I think I speak for most of the others here- though of course they're free to join in and correct me if they so wish- when I say that we try to argue from the words that are actually in the bible, without having to deal with the arcane eisegesis of those already committed to making the text fit with their own lives. Without adequate justification or knowledge of the original authorial intent, the only thing we can safely presume to be a part of scriptural teachings are the words within the bible, which express unambiguously that disbelief in Jesus is an unforgivable sin that will keep us out of heaven. The problem comes from christians like you who are more than happy to swoop down and disagree, without giving any form of justification that might show you to be right; were essentially left with no reason to believe you, while also being scoffed at about how poor our knowledge of the bible is.

 

Am I aloud to do that with evolution?   I can argue against "the goo deciding to get up and walk into the zoo". and how silly that is!   And I don't see others prefacing their posts with "my interpretation" or citing which interpretation they are referring to.  So I find your post a bit dis-ingenuous.  However this is just my interpretation.

I'm not asking that we have these discussions where anyone just picks whatever definition they like and run with it, that'd be ridiculous. All I ask is that you a: relinquish the presupposition that what you think the scriptures say is the only legitimate reading of them, and that b: where our interpretations diverge, we all support our ideas with a little more evidence than nothing at all. It's no accident, you'll find, that every interpretation of the bible you see in this thread from atheists has a little more meat on them bones than just "you're wrong though," which was all you saw fit to contribute in the post I initially quoted, or "I'm right though," which is all your fellow theist GC ever posts. Explain why you think the way you do and there's absolutely no issue; just saying that you're right and we're wrong is effectively the same as saying nothing at all. What you think is less important than why you think it.