TTM

I don't know ... I read Ayn Rand once. It was painful

Islam gets put in the same box as all other religions. And hopefully some day we lock the box and burn it. Until then, feel free to criticise any person or group that uses religion to justify immoral actions.

Depending on who you ask, he committed all of these or none. Which is why it doesn't matter. You're trying to argue from inside the fever dream ... it doesn't matter who's unicorn is prettiest.

Right, but it is is not the religion (as in the fixed texts) that changed, but the culture around it and hence the interpretation (or better yet, lack of) of that religion

Lack of resolve ... oh, you mean my amused bewilderment? I recognise the point you are trying to make. It's wasted effort ... your aim is askew.

Posthumous prosecution?

Couldn't say. Not really relevant as the statute of limitations has passed.

We seem to more or less agree. My mistake then.

The answer is zero, so far as we know. I asked why it matters

Read my post. I said in his name

Thousands? Millions? Couldn't say, I'm not a historian.

I ain't afraid of no ghosts

Why does this matter? Plenty were in his name

So the current and historical crimes of committed in the names of other religions are OK because their religious texts are slightly nicer?

Actually (at least) three wrongs, and none of them add up to a right. You can't seem to see the forest for one particular tree.

Deuteronomy 13:6-10 (KJV) 6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. Of course this is Old Testament, which is apparently only still part of the Christian faith where convenient, the remainder of the passages being there for ... historical colour? Of course the Jewish religion has no such additional Testament, so this kind of reflects rather poorly on them. The New Testamement is not cut and dry on the subject, but does include Matthew 18:6: 6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. Note: In the active voice σκανδαλίζω [skandalizō] means "cause someone to fall away from (or reject) faith," as in the saying of Jesus about the person who "causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin [stumble]" (Wikipedia) We also have well over a milenium of the historical treatment of apostasy and heresy by Christians. It is not the particulars of the religion that is an issue, but the mindset of the culture towards it: fundamentalism, extremism, etc. Arguing about which flavour of fairy tales is inherently more harmful misses the point entirely.

If you look at his words and actions stretching back long before he even contemplated running for president, it's pretty clear he is both a racist and a misogynist. He's maybe more driven by some of his other personality flaws but that doesn't mean his support for the "alt-right" is a front. Re: Hillary ... lol, yup.

Beaver: small unassuming animal who though quiet hard work is able to alter the course of rivers and change entire ecosystems. Seems pretty good to me.

True. I picture Betsy as home schooled though

I assume you mean post 108 - "heavens" including the solar system? And you explain the explicit creation of the sun, moon, and stars (which would include the other planets) on the fourth day how? 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

You forgot the best part: day and night cycles before the creation of the sun or planet...

Oh, I understand all right. You apparently don't recognise a dismissive rephrasing when you see one. You could *try* to refute it ... I mean I'm not sure what sort of twisted "logic" and random non sequiturs you could use to do so, but I have faith

Let's try this. Your argument: God has intimate knowledge of his creation, i.e there's modern science hidden in the bible Evidence: Selected bible passages, often interpreted in a way that contradicts their face value meaning; i.e. interpreted as figures of speech which can be rephrased in a way that supports current scientific understanding. Many other passages that contadict modern science ignored or handwaved away as figures of speech with no real meaning. My argument: The cosmology of the bible is that of the ancient Hebrews, as described in contemporary documents like 1 Enoch, and in no way matches modern scientific understanding. Evidence: Every single bible passage dealing with or touching on cosmology, taken at face value.

What else do you call admitting to selectively (and shall we say "loosely") interpreting certain passages to match modern science, while ignoring everything contradictory to modern science as "figure of speech"

That makes sense ... flew right over my head