Recently I spoke to a well known Christian apologist, So I mentioned that I took the side of agnosticism, And since I cited some agnostics who have been public like Huxley and bart ehrman and went on to say how there writing impacted me a whole lot , I got a response from him that these men were attacking the bible. it seems anytime an anti-theist critiques the bible with legitimate arguments from scholar credentials it is called an attack, No matter how valid the argument is presented. But when a Christian apologist examines the bible it is called a critique.Something is dreadfully wrong with this kind of hermeneutics. What do you think?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I agree!
A real attack is an attempt to destroy by all means, fair or foul. Honest criticism is an attempt to point out (thereby correcting) errors. Among real seekers of truth, honest criticism counts as a good thing.
I think a quote from our religious friend simply agnostic is in order:
"may the love of jesus be in your heart love your neighbor as yourself,and love god with all your heart, soul strength and mind your whole fabric.love is patient love is kind.the real attributes of a follower of christ."
We will see if he can remain agnostic for long.