Replies

FK: "Why don't they see that when they mock those who believe that Paul's writings are true, they are also mocking Paul, as well as God? "

So, questioning is the same as mocking? I spent the early part of my life in a place where it was a crime to question "official truth." I have promised myself ever since my parents brought me to this country, to never accept "official truth" just because some people say it's "sacred."

Sometimes questioning is the same as mocking, and sometimes it isn't. It just depends on the presentation. But I'm not really bent out of shape over any of that as it concerns ME. I just don't like it when Christians go after Paul. :)

Now, of course questions are perfectly appropriate. If the scriptures were not God-breathed, then questions would be inappropriate because they would defeat the faith. However, since the scriptures ARE God-breathed it is fully able to take on all comers. At least, that is my position. We run into problems when we cannot agree on what the Bible means by "scriptures" and what "God-breathed" means. Those presuppositions are critical to our respective views of the Bible. Of course without common presuppositions, it is extremely difficult for our side to convince you that the Bible proves itself. If the Bible really IS just "some other book", then your objections would appear quite valid. Based on available information, Peter probably couldn't have written 1 and 2 Peter, etc.

Sometimes questioning is the same as mocking, and sometimes it isn't. It just depends on the presentation

Yes, to a large extent. But, if you think about it, mocking is never really questioning because the intent is not to get to the bottom of an issue, but to ridicule it.

We run into problems when we cannot agree on what the Bible means by "scriptures" and what "God-breathed" means. Those presuppositions are critical to our respective views of the Bible

Because we are talking about perceptions and not necessarily the truth. And who or what shapes our perceptions is behind our disagreements.

A criminal doesn't necessarily think he is doing something 'wrong' for stealing cigarettes at a gas station and killing the obstinate clerk who decided to be in his way. Man's gotta smoke, and if you don't have the money, well then feeding your addiction by stealing and killing seems perfectly "justified" in the criminal's mind! You are messing with his needs now...so we have to be careful before we assume that our position is "justified" because that's how we perceive it.

If you assume the Bible is inerrant word of God, than the Bible doesn't have to prove itself, and anyone who questions it is automatically wrong, and blasphemous, and that just may be sufficient 'justification' to be deprived of life.

Look at the case of a 23-year-old journalist in Afghanistan who will most probably end his young life on gallows. His crime: insult to Islam. The charge for which he has been found guilty and sentenced to death by an Afghan judge: he downloaded a page from the Internet, and shared it with his students.

The document asked why is having more than one wife in Islam acceptable when it come to men, but having more than one husband is not acceptable when it comes to women! (the answer is quite simple and not so ridiculous as one might think)

And, for this he is going to die? All this on presumption of those in power that the Koran is "holy" and "God-breathed" and that anyone questioning it is as good as dead—because to fundamentalist minds questioning the official truth is as good as mocking it?

This is fundamentalism, FK. It is the same mental process regardless which religion or political system is involved; it varies only in degree.