This continues to be a troll, but I'll bite. Hopefully in such a way that no one else has to.
Arguing from obviousness about religious beliefs? Come on, people have fought wars over the iota in homoiousious. Arguing from obviousness in interpreting a passage in the New Testament? Learn about hermeneutics. One text, many interpretations, and as many as there are people willing to approach the text authentically.
And let me give you something only a Christian would say, so you can be educated. Bible study is not an end in itself. It is a means to becoming more like Jesus, becoming closer to Jesus. So I take a dim view of arguments that purport to assume a Christian belief and the status quo, then derive a contradiction. These arguments are about the periphery of Christianity. If you want to create some cognitive dissonance, head for the center.
I read that (crappy) Wikipedia article on usury, including the strands of Christian thought that disagree with the non-interpretation of those New Testament passages in the Wikipedia. For instance, the section on the scholastics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury#Usury_in_scholastic_theol...
So instead of taking the reductionist appeal to obviousness and playing word games with quotations that you interpret privately, maybe you can go through the two millennia of source material on the question and offer the definitive breakdown. Send me a link to your dissertation when you're done.
More to the point, this and many other religious beliefs inhere in systems of thought, not random answers to random questions. You just asked, "When did you stop feeling cognitive dissonance about your beliefs?", and I might rightly be skeptical that you even cared about the answer.
You don't understand a religion until you understand it from the perspective of someone who lives it. You don't understand a religious belief unless you locate it in the network of beliefs, the worldview, that it belongs to. And you don't discredit a religion by raising questions about disputable matters.
Arguing from obviousness about religious beliefs? Come on, people have fought wars over the iota in homoiousious. Arguing from obviousness in interpreting a passage in the New Testament? Learn about hermeneutics. One text, many interpretations, and as many as there are people willing to approach the text authentically.
And let me give you something only a Christian would say, so you can be educated. Bible study is not an end in itself. It is a means to becoming more like Jesus, becoming closer to Jesus. So I take a dim view of arguments that purport to assume a Christian belief and the status quo, then derive a contradiction. These arguments are about the periphery of Christianity. If you want to create some cognitive dissonance, head for the center.
I read that (crappy) Wikipedia article on usury, including the strands of Christian thought that disagree with the non-interpretation of those New Testament passages in the Wikipedia. For instance, the section on the scholastics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury#Usury_in_scholastic_theol...
So instead of taking the reductionist appeal to obviousness and playing word games with quotations that you interpret privately, maybe you can go through the two millennia of source material on the question and offer the definitive breakdown. Send me a link to your dissertation when you're done.
More to the point, this and many other religious beliefs inhere in systems of thought, not random answers to random questions. You just asked, "When did you stop feeling cognitive dissonance about your beliefs?", and I might rightly be skeptical that you even cared about the answer.
You don't understand a religion until you understand it from the perspective of someone who lives it. You don't understand a religious belief unless you locate it in the network of beliefs, the worldview, that it belongs to. And you don't discredit a religion by raising questions about disputable matters.