Amazon.com Widgets

Are all Christian religions fallacious because they cherry pick the Bible without justification?

Asked by: Sagey
  • There Is No Instructive Text From The Bible Authors Indicating Which Passages In The Bible Are Metaphorical And Which Are To Be Considered As Truth:

    All Christian religions decide for themselves which passages they Want (operative word) to consider as Metaphor and Which passages they are willing to accept as Fact or Truth. Thus they are all tailoring the scriptures towards their Myside Bias which is a type of Fallacy.
    So all Christian religions are thus based on severe Myside Bias Fallacies, in their interpretation of scripture.
    Factually, if they wanted their religion to be non-fallacious, they must accept all of the Bible as either Truth or Metaphor.
    The most rational religions would consider the entire Bible as Metaphorical.
    The least Rational religion would consider all the Bible as Absolute Fact.
    Ken Ham in his debate with Bill Nye demonstrated this MySide Bias Fallacy in that he considers only parts of the book of Genesis as absolute Fact, and bases his entire teachings on it, even though the order of Creation and the Flat Circular Disk of Earth have been proven wrong by science,
    Though Ken considers as Metaphorical, passages like Genesis 1:6-17, where there was a dome above the earth with sun, moon and starts attached, Revelations 6:13 Mark 13:25, where the stars attached to the dome above the earth as in Genesis 1:15-16, would fall to earth if the earth was shaken. And the Earth being held up by pillars in 1 Samuel 2:8 and other passages.

    Since there is no written addendum or instructions from the Bible scribes, indicating which passages are to be considered metaphorical or which are definitely Truth, the entire Bible must be considered as one or the other.
    So Ken's version of the Bible is entirely created by his own mind and is entirely subjective, not at all an objective belief system which is what science can be described as being.

    All Christian sects like Creationism, decide which scriptures are Metaphorical and which are Truth, based on their very own Myside-Bias-Fallacy.

    Thus: The only Conclusion I can make is that all Christian Sects are Fallacious!

  • Cherry picking Christians...

    The problem for me is not the constant cherry picking that Christians do, but the fact that they can throw out 90% of one of their books and still claim that 10% as part of their religion. If you are going to cherry pick than throw out the whole part of the Bible or none of it. If you don't than it is an even bigger fallacy.

    Posted by: SNP1
  • I believe so

    Christians cherry pick their bible all the time. They conveniently ignore the parts about stoning gays, and unwed non-virgins and all of the other moral preachings Leviticus and Deuteronomy have to teach us because of how inconvenient it would be for them. That being said as an Atheist I'd rather deal with hypocritical Christians than Westboro baptist church Christians.

  • It is all one book that doesn't have any factual backup.

    It is one book that contains all of the knowledge that they should live by ... But they don't! Why? Most of the stories are contradictory then there is today's law that doesn't let you do what the book tell you to do ... The book is old and it should be treated as an old book that belongs to museum of history.

  • It's the same book.

    All Christian Religions are indeed, fallacious, because you can't really say that everything in the bible is literal. If you do, you're going to find a lot of contradictions (some books of the bible contradicts with others, and, ofc, a lot of things written there differ from reality, in which case you can only say it's wrong or it's figurative).
    If you do not say everything is literal...How can you say which part is and which is not? It's totally arbitrary. Aand since it's arbitrary, yes, you can say they "cherry pick" the bible without justification.

  • In the same book that is used for gays being an abomination it also lists eating shell fish(shrimp,lobster etc) also even touching the unclean animals

    Christians choose parts they want to and avoid looking at the whole chapter. Divorce, eating pork, eating shellfish is ok because it changed in the new testament, We are to help the poor and needy but yet every day more and more ministers say the poor should just go off and die.

  • Theological study is biased and a Myself Bias Fallacy and different from theoretical differences in science.

    Because Theology cherry picks based on the modern interpretation which is completely different from the original intention of the verses cherry picked. While scientific theories have external validations while the claims in Theology have only one basis and it is not an External source. There is only one source with no external evidence.

  • Theological study is biased and a Myself Bias Fallacy and different from theoretical differences in science.

    Because Theology cherry picks based on the modern interpretation which is completely different from the original intention of the verses cherry picked. While scientific theories have external validations while the claims in Theology have only one basis and it is not an External source. There is only one source with no external evidence.

  • This question is fallacious.

    To begin with, to say that they "cherry pick without justification" ignores the existence of the field of study know as theology, which is essentially the justification of various views of God. Also, I highly doubt that the person who created this poll is a scholar qualified to assert that no Christian sect properly interprets Scripture despite not knowing proper English.

    On top of this, we must consider that just because various models of Christianity exist does not mean that Christianity as a whole is false any more than various models of evolution mean that the theory of evolution is false.

  • "By speaking of a new covenant, God has made the first one old; and anything that becomes old and worn out will soon disappear."

    [Hebrews 8:13 GNT]

    Christianity follows the law set by the New testament, the relevant law that God and his son set. By creating this new covenant the old mosaic laws have been revised and/or removed. The old testament is now, in it's integrity, obsolete and serves as the storage of the old laws, the metaphors that then where and the stories of the former teachings of the lord. What remains is what Jesus himself taught us and what he held in regards. That means that the more 'humane' part of Christianity is now the norm. The many teachings of Christ that mostly deal with how we communicate with the lord and each other are what Christians follow, Repent and you are forgiven. Forgive every sin that others do upon you and the lord shall forgive every sin you do upon him. Act with the greatest care, tolerance and love, and in return receive the same at your final day.

  • You cant say all of anything

    To say all Christian religions are fallacious, would be stupid and ignorant. All the atheists will say otherwise because they are jealous that atheism isn't as popular as Christianity, get over it.

    Also, atheists will claim that God uses magic to do his works, does a carpenter use magic to make a table? Or a chair? No, so get with it you idiot atheists.

  • If you know your bible well enough, this is not a question.

    People see the bible as just a collection of laws and passages, but there is more to understand than the literal passages. And this "cherry picking" is not excluded to Atheists. There are a lot of Old Testament passages and laws that are definitely brutal. But these laws were lifted after the Resurrection and the world was brought into the New Testament. Now, all that remains is the Ten Commandments, and I don't think you guys have a problem with those.

  • The epistles of Paul

    Tell you which commands from the Bible you should follow if you want to become a Christian. Most Christians I know follow these quite well. I am not a Christian either so I have no dog in this fight. Furthermore contradictions in the Bible are usually found when atheists take passages from it out of all their context. You could do this with all religions and find passages in their holy books that seem to contradict one another.

  • This sounds like a troll post, but I'll answer anyway.

    You are making generalizations about us. I can assure you that there are plenty of us that don't cherry pick out of the Bible, me included. Tee Old Testament had some harsh laws, but Jesus refuted most of them in the New Testament. Honestly, you can't say you know every Christian out there does this.

  • There is no need to cherry pick the Bible if you have a coherent understanding of what it is.

    I'm going to begin with a disclaimer that some people won't like my arguments from because they don't conform to their particular theistic view, while others will condemn them merely because they come from an understanding of theism. To both I say "you idiots are exactly the same." The Bible is not a rule book from God, but a historiographical document written by people, and all forms of Christianity recognize this; you would be hard pressed to find a Christian who condemns bacon cheeseburgers on theological grounds. The fact that some passages might be literal and some parables or metaphors only reflects the understanding and literary style of the authors. If the Bible explained the creation of the world in the most accurate terms as seen by modern physics, then not only would those terms probably appear ridiculous a few hundred years from now, but it would also be pointless because people in the Iron Age would have neither understood nor cared, and you would be left with a physics text. Then there's the issue of which documents and which version you accept as canon, as these things were also decided by people. Finally, since the Bible is not a rulebook or the sole possible source of theological interpretation, there are many widely accepted aspects of Christianity which don't come from the Bible or derive from intricate interpretations rather the source scripture. There is hardly a reference to, and certainly no explicit description of a hell in the Bible, and if you accept Revelations, it certainly isn't eternal, and even the ten commandments, though all commandments, are singled out as distinguishable from the commandments about hygiene or the commandments about making a tent to house the covenant. If the Bible were a rulebook, then yes it would be a self-contradicting document because it involves a number of very different stories. Both arguments against the Bible and for absurd interpretations certainly rely on cherry-picking. The Bible mentions slavery and states rules about how slaves should be treated, but it's not because the Bible condones slavery, rather it's because it was created to address the problems real world. Some parents don't want their children to learn about the Bible on the basis that bad things happen to people in it, but that's because they want to raise their children in an ideal fantasy world where bad things don't have to happen. So in conclusion, if you're a nitwit trying to prove you have more faith than anyone by insisting you adhere more closely to the Bible than someone else, or if you're making a lazy attempt discredit all the ideas that have come out of many thousands of years of philosophical tradition, then yes you would have to cherry pick the Bible.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Sagey says2014-02-07T00:32:24.993
Oops 4got to take the Are out when I changed it from a statement to a question. Time limit I would blame on this, work is starting to get busy.
Sagey says2014-02-07T02:00:34.713
If anybody takes any work of literature and only accepts those bits that suit their particular Biases and ignores all that don't suit their Biases, then they will not be interpreting the literature in the way that was intended by the Author(s).
Thus their interpretation is Confirmation Bias Based and Wrong or Fallacious.
All Christian sects I've looked at practice this Confirmation Bias interpretation of the Bible, even Theology commits exactly the same Cherry Picking or Selective acceptance of passages based on Bias, fallacious interpretation.

The only way to interpret a piece of literature in the way that the Author's intended it is to accept the entire work.
If the Authors added an addendum stating that passages a, f, x and y are intended to be metaphorical or ignored, then there is justification for those passages to be ignored or considered as metaphor.
Or if the passages themselves have introductions stating that ignore this next paragraph or the next paragraph is not intended to be considered truthful, there is justification for considering them as such.
But, the Bible does not have such addendum nor introductions within, so the Authors intended every word to be taken as Truth.
To say otherwise has no justification whatsoever.
Theologians are worse than most Christians at fallacious cherry picking, and what's worse, they consider themselves their own justification.
Now that's what is diagnosed as Narcissistic Magalomania.
Because a theologian knows no more about the "Mind Of God" than any lay person who has read the Bible as well.
They only fallaciously cherry pick to make themselves appear as if they do know more.
Sagey says2014-02-11T23:44:04
Though I have also learned that many of the Books of the modern Bible have been corrupted and huge chunks of the Bible had no traditional authors, but were added to by more recent interpolations in order to change the meaning of scriptural texts to be more in line with a different form of reasoning than the original, traditional authors intended.
The councils of Nicaea and other Bible review and collation gatherings were examples of adding fabrications to the Bible scripture.
There were actually 40 Gospels from which the 4 canonical Gospels eventually became chosen and these were the ones that were closer to what those choosing the Gospels wanted the Bible to portray. Thus the Bible is really a political document, that supports the agendas of the conveners of the councils that altered or fabricated the scriptures.
Constantine turned it into such a political document for his own agendas.