orbitaldiamonds: "bible" with cross, underneath, "the gospel according to st. bastard" ([ heathenry ] the gospel of st. bastard)
The Patriotic Earthling ([personal profile] orbitaldiamonds) wrote2010-03-24 09:00 am

I could use some help.

Is there a good way to say "no, the Christian penchant for cherry-picking and double-speak does not surprise me at all"--a way that a believer friend would not find offensive?

And this is an open-minded friend from a rather secular society (she's Australian and "agnostic at best"/"believer"), yet she found the above offensive. I don't know if it's social ineptitude or undiagnosed Asperger's or what, but I (a) don't understand why it's offensive and (b) can't think of a more delicate way to put it.

The reason I find it inoffensive is because both liberal and conservative Christians have certain parts of the Bible that they highlight and parts that they ignore. If you think that slavery is wrong, if you think that homosexuals don't deserve to die for being homosexual, if you don't see a woman as the property first of her father and then of her husband, you're on the right side of history--but if you also believe in the Gospels and that Jesus is the Son of God, born of a virgin, then you're cherry-picking the Bible.

Hell, even the Dominionists are cherry-picking because the books of the Bible themselves were cherry-picked from a larger selection of texts.

But to my original question...any ideas? My friend and I have already cooled off and made up from that particular discussion (not that it really got rude, though), but I've had this on my mind for the past few days.

Thanks in advance.

(cross-post: [info]atheism, [info]antitheism, [info]atheist, and my DW/LJ.)

Post a comment in response:

Identity URL: 
Account name:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.


Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.