Originally posted by FreakyKBH
1) That'd be unusual, don't you think? ...
2) That point has already been established, but not by you ...
3) Sheer and unadulterated arrogance, with a pinch of ignorance for good measure, it is assumed.
4) Not at all.
5) Are you sure? Sounds like you haven't really thought it through yet.
(I've numbered your replies for easier referencing)
1) I should rephrase what I wrote initially as: "In all honesty I think you've misunderstood what is actually quite a simple explanation of
what I believe to be a major problem with the account of the Fall. Your response suggests that you acknowledge that from my rational scientific background, of course I would find problems with the account - whereas from your position of having already chosen to believe, you've been able to convince yourself that the account does indeed make sense. This is what's known as circular logic - you're admitting that your acceptance of the story (and somewhat dodgy denial of the inherent problems) is a result of your belief - which is taken in part from the bible. Circular logic doesn't go down very well in scientific circles, though I guess you already realise that my standards are very different to yours when it comes to logical analysis.
2) Yes, so the implication of this is ... that really Adam and Eve had no meaningful choice to eat the fruit or not - which undermines free will.
3) No no no you've reverted to your condemnation
sans explanation mode of reply - If you could go some way to actually explaining where you see me as going so wrong, then I have a chance of redemption, whereas at the moment, I am lost. I don't believe my interpretation of the creation story and fall is contorted, I've read them at face value, I've been read them only the other day at the Easter Vigil Mass.
4) I think you're now in the realms of useless semantics. In a Venn diagram, belief is confined within circles, religion is confined to circles, hope and faith in anything which can not be known - are confined to circles. Where I stand however, is in the vast sea of nothing which all the others are floating in. Belief is not binary, there is not believing, and then a whole host of things to believe in. A religion then is certainly not what I see my beliefs aligning best with.
5) I think we all have issues with what to believe in - most people don't see these issues - some, like you and I, try and grapple with them. People like you, alter their interpretation of what they have the original issues with, so that they are more comfortable with them - that way, none of the benefits of belief are removed. Those like myself remove the issues by removing the source - i.e. the belief. This leaves all the problems belief can help - mostly to do with feeling fulfilled in life. My position requires less analysis of the text - granted, but that's the point.