Sacrifices are sick! Contradiction Alert!!!

[Jackalope]

The "source" we're talking about is over 2000 years old and one that most here don't believe anyways.

Relevance? Even one who doesn't believe it is capable of analyzing the content.

The said "source" was originally written for reflection and interpretation.

Assertion and opinion. Certainly that is plausible for some of it. Other parts, not so much. (Which I'll note is also assertion and opinion, all else being equal, with as much value as yours - which is to say not much.)

The said "source" also points out various discrepancies that says specifically that the "source" had scribes that lied.

No argument here on that point. The only contention would be as to which portions have been altered (which, given the lack of original texts, will likely be argued long after you and I are dust).

So, that so-called "point" was a dishonest attack to misrepresent my words... And I never said "any source" now did I???

Not how I read the poster's intent, rather I saw it as an exercise to point out that one can selectively quote to make it appear that something said pretty much whatever you want it to.

Really now, is the "point", one that I'm supposed to believe every word?

See above.

As a matter of fact, no. Furthermore, I'd go so far to say that one who does believe every word has some serious critical thinking deficiencies (again, my opinion, worth every penny you paid for it).

Personally, I couldn't care less what you believe, nor do I particularly care that you cherry pick which verses you find relevant (realistically, you pretty much have to in my view). The only thing I find curious about cherry picking is the question of why this verse, and not that verse, which appears to say something quite different from the verse that you prefer. (Reference my earlier comment regarding selective quoting and interpreting a text to say whatever one wants it to.)

If you think you can defend cherry picking one particular verse over another that doesn't seem to support your position (whatever the hell that happens to be, as you've not exactly been forthcoming), knock yourself out.

Just don't be terribly surprised when someone takes the opportunity to demonstrate that they don't see it as intellectually honest if your argument isn't persuasive. Pretty much an uphill battle when you're in hostile territory (so to speak), from where I sit.