Cherry-picking vs choosing what's logical to you.

File: 1484530253208.jpg (205KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1024x768px

why do some people sperg out about dogma?

>>2389422
Because it's the internet, and if they did it in real life in front of people who are not apart of their religion, they would probably get hit.

>>2389422
>>2389441
Its a real source of controversy. When does someone cease to be something because they do or don't believe in or practice X versus just believing in or practicing a version of X that seems logical.

>>2389381

Simple. It's the values that you believe to be true or just versus elevating an ideology or work above all others because it occasionally suggests values you agree with.

If you want to promote the Bible or Qu'ran, for example, as an all around good text to live one's life around, you must be prepared to defend or adhere to every controversial paragraph of that work because you thought the book and/or religion were more important than individual values like taking care of other people and respecting the property of others.

People are abandoning religion in the west because the baggage is too heavy.

>>2389455
>If you want to promote the Bible or Qu'ran, for example, as an all around good text to live one's life around, you must be prepared to defend or adhere to every controversial paragraph of that work because you thought the book and/or religion were more important than individual values like taking care of other people and respecting the property of others.
A complex example, as Christians were never required to follow every paragraph of the Old Testament (which is many different books From a period of many centuries) nor were they expected to.

From a Catholic example, I guess you could say believing in and following the Catechism is to be a true Catholic. But what about those who's understanding of the faith is different but they evidence to back up their position?

>>2389464
>But what about those who's understanding of the faith is different but they evidence to back up their position?

Then that's not really cherry picking, is it? That's just following a different interpretation of the text. That's not the same as tearing out entire pages and pretending they don't exist or apply to you.

>>2389485
>Then that's not really cherry picking, is it? That's just following a different interpretation of the text. That's not the same as tearing out entire pages and pretending they don't exist or apply to you.

True. The problem then becomes people accuse you of being inauthentic because of their different opinion or lack of understanding. Leaving no true consensus. I guess a "true consensus" doesn't really matter. Only what you know yourself to be true. The only issue with that, however, is you can get people completely wrong with the opposite beliefs thinking they are truly X. The remedy could be debunking them, which only works if they don't have enough to back up their position. Fixing the problem.

>>2389381
>common sense
is about accepting likely answer no matter how emotionally painful and terrifying.
>hypocrites
are in denial so they stagnate.