Faith or lack thereof isn't the issue but having an understanding of something one expresses a strong opinion. Did you know frogs become deaf if you cut off all their limbs? I can "prove" it.
If you pound a table on which a frog rests it jumps. Remove both forelimbs and it still jumps. Leave it with just one leg and it still tries although badly. Cut that last one and it doesn't move at all. Deaf as a stone.
Well that's ridiculous of course but if one really wants to stick with it, one could. Just ignore everything else and pound the table.
That isn't religion, it's intellectual laziness. In battle that gets you killed, in academia it gets you ridicule, and in medicine it gets someone else dead.
One can argue the merits of anything, but doing so without making an attempt to grasp the situation makes less than no sense.
In this case you isolate one verse, yet if you made an effort to think about what was written you would have dismissed your line of thought immediately.
Consider that the same book you use as evidence says that he healed the sick, raised the dead, ate with tax collectors, prostitutes and all manner of the "unclean", protected an adulteress from being stoned and then out of the clear blue yelled at those who condemned him because they didn't stone their kids? How can you even put forward a reasonable argument in that context?
You don't have me down on you because you don't like Christians but because you fell back on the absurd.
I'll even help you. If you want to fault Christianity as it's practiced by some look at Family Life Network who went into Uganda where brutality was the norm and like complete tools vilified gays so well that they can be imprisoned or executed. Now that's an argument based on something. I didn't have to fall back on specious reasoning. .
Facebook
Twitter