Protestantism

» pink101 - Original blog

.
If you want to argue that stoning out-of-control, dangerous, and rebellious male teens was "reprehensible," then we can debate that. If you're going to argue that the passage applies to little kids, then I think we're engaged in a red herring debate (if that's the right term) - an effort to attack the Bible that frankly isn't based on anything of substance.
.
Your statement brings up the Windshuttle quotation I gave in this http://protestantism.suite101.com/discus... thread.
.
The biblical injunctions that allowed the stoning of youngsters might be seen as reprehensible today; but, I'm sure that it was seen as justified during the time it was legislated. So, we are able to see that truth is relative.
.
We are able to see it, that is, as long as we accept the fact that times have changed. Otherwise, we're stuck in a past that is described to us in literature that was written thousands of years ago.
.
No wonder the grand narratives fail us.
.

-- posted by pink101