Is the religious left too nice and without influence?

[Act_of_Reparation]

83. It isn't the conclusion that concerns me, it is the method

I don't mean to say that every interpretation is equally valid when put through the rigors of scholarship. I mean to say that a person who pulls public policy from ancient scripture is in a poor position to criticize somebody else for doing precisely the same thing.

Cbayer would argue that this is all an issue of interpretation, that the religious right is twisting the Bible out of context into some horrific parody of itself. I contend this isn't really the case. There are parts of the Bible which are completely unambiguous. Many of these are genuinely awful.

I think we can all agree the Religious Right isn't an academic Christian movement. They don't learn Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek. They don't understand historical context. They think God is with them when they read and tells them their reading of the words is correct. Saying that, it is important to remember that some of their more truly horrible propositions are derived from passages requiring little or no interpretation whatsoever.

Just as an example, Paul puts it in no uncertain terms that homosexuals are deserving of death.

So, to clarify, it isn't my position that every interpretation of the Bible is equally valid. Rather, my contention is that pulling public policy from a collection of Bronze Age texts should not be encouraged. Both sides are somewhat selective in what they pull, but both ascribe credibility and authority to a book that really doesn't deserve it.