RE: Pat Robertson says it's ok to ignore parts of the Bible.
July 9, 2012 at 4:42 pm
(This post was last modified: July 9, 2012 at 4:46 pm by Ziploc Surprise.)
Ok, how about I copy and paste the whole text.
"Apparently, we can pick and choose parts of the Bible after all, says Pat Robertson. When asked on the 700 Club today why some believe “America was founded as a Christian nation” even though it allowed slavery, Robertson said, “like it or not, if you read the Bible in the Old Testament, slavery was permitted.” But Robertson concluded that despite what the Bible says, “We have moved in our conception of the value of human beings until we realized slavery was terribly wrong.” Of course, when Dan Savage made a similar point about the Bible (albeit with saltier language), the Religious Right was irate."
When the passage said "(Pat Robertson said) We can pick and choose parts of the Bible after all." This was not a direct quote from Pat Robertson. It was a comentary about what he essentially said. Pat Robertson said (paraphrased for argument) that the Bible says slavery is permitted but then he said "we have moved in our conception of the value of human beings until we realized slavery was terribly wrong". If Pat Robertson agrees that these two things are true you must logically have to ignore one rule/moral in favor of the other. The argument turns on the value of a human being. The OT says the value of a human being can be little enough to purchase him or her for money. Our new conception of the value of a human being is that human beings are far to valuable to be purchased. Humans are no longer to be considered things that can be bought and sold. It is wrong to buy and sell human beings. Therefore to say that "Pat Robertson says we can pick and choose parts of the Bible" in the context of a comentary (as it was meant in the article that accompanied the video) is a correct assessment of what Pat Robertson said given the information we have.
"Apparently, we can pick and choose parts of the Bible after all, says Pat Robertson. When asked on the 700 Club today why some believe “America was founded as a Christian nation” even though it allowed slavery, Robertson said, “like it or not, if you read the Bible in the Old Testament, slavery was permitted.” But Robertson concluded that despite what the Bible says, “We have moved in our conception of the value of human beings until we realized slavery was terribly wrong.” Of course, when Dan Savage made a similar point about the Bible (albeit with saltier language), the Religious Right was irate."
When the passage said "(Pat Robertson said) We can pick and choose parts of the Bible after all." This was not a direct quote from Pat Robertson. It was a comentary about what he essentially said. Pat Robertson said (paraphrased for argument) that the Bible says slavery is permitted but then he said "we have moved in our conception of the value of human beings until we realized slavery was terribly wrong". If Pat Robertson agrees that these two things are true you must logically have to ignore one rule/moral in favor of the other. The argument turns on the value of a human being. The OT says the value of a human being can be little enough to purchase him or her for money. Our new conception of the value of a human being is that human beings are far to valuable to be purchased. Humans are no longer to be considered things that can be bought and sold. It is wrong to buy and sell human beings. Therefore to say that "Pat Robertson says we can pick and choose parts of the Bible" in the context of a comentary (as it was meant in the article that accompanied the video) is a correct assessment of what Pat Robertson said given the information we have.
(July 9, 2012 at 3:52 pm)Minimalist Wrote:ThanksQuote:Straight from the horse's mouth ass.
Fixed that for you.
I have studied the Bible and the theology behind Christianity for many years. I have been to many churches. I have walked the depth and the breadth of the religion and, as a result of this, I have a lot of bullshit to scrape off the bottom of my shoes. ~Ziploc Surprise
