(September 19, 2009 at 11:08 am)InfidelRudy Wrote: My argument is, if some has to be interpreted, then it is inherently ambiguous. And any interpretation of an ambiguous entity cannot be tagged right or wrong from an absolute point of view.
Since both sides are as logical, in no way we can chose either as a "better" or correct interpretation. Interpretation is not the problem, problem is the ambiguous source. And this is true for all the religion in the world. What can you expect from 2k-3k years old scriptures and scrolls anyway? When you do cherry picking, it automatically implies that most of them is unpalatable or rotten.
As has been my arguement for a long time now. Thank you for sharing that as it reaffirms my belief I am correct in that interpretation of the Bible and Koran. Both books are way to ambiguous to be taken seriously when a theist presents them as the words and instructions of a God.
I used to tell a lot of religious jokes. Not any more, I'm a registered sects offender.
---------------
...the least christian thing a person can do is to become a christian. ~Chuck
---------------
NO MA'AM
---------------
...the least christian thing a person can do is to become a christian. ~Chuck
---------------
NO MA'AM
![[Image: attemptingtogiveadamnc.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=img824.imageshack.us%2Fimg824%2F7042%2Fattemptingtogiveadamnc.gif)