Do you 'Cherry Pick' the Bible?

Important...but I ain't condoning the stoning of anyone. Are those that don't cherry pick anything ready to throw the first stone?
 
Namaste Jesus said:
I suppose if you're trying to shift the meaning of the thread it doesn't. The question posed in the thread however, was not intended to address political or religious organization agendas. Otherwise I would have posted it in the 'Politics' section.
Click to expand...

Okay, then I did misunderstand the point of the thread. When you asked if people cherry pick or not, I did not realize you were asking only those of us personally on this board. For me personally, the answer would have to be None of the Above. I am not Christian. The Bible is but one of many religious texts around the world; I believe all of them were written by mortals.
 
Namaste Jesus said:
In conclusion, if you're looking for solace, inner peace, validation or what have you, 'Cherry Pick' away, but if you're truly trying to understand the Bible, it needs to be considered in it's entirety.
Click to expand...
I agree.

If what you seek is to feel good about yourself, cherry-pick away.
If you seek to understand, look deeper.
 
wil said:
Important...but I ain't condoning the stoning of anyone. Are those that don't cherry pick anything ready to throw the first stone?
Click to expand...
LOL, Wil, you've been throqwing stones at Catholics and others for as long as I can remember ...
 
Thomas my brother, I know you enjoy the pot shots, and that you take things personally. I call them as I see them and try not to play favorites.

But I ask again... what is cherry picking to you? You say there are people that don't... what does that mean? Surely not that they take things literally, as you have taught me our American Bible thumpers and the church don't agree.

You see the mystical aspects of scripture, you discuss the allegory and metaphors... You've said to me, regarding Jesus, "I wish he hadn't said that" I stand on my contention, that by my understanding everyone cherry picks.... and until someone shows me the person that doesn't, or an alternate acceptable definition....that isn't going to change.

Thru discussion, contemplation of your posts you've earned our respect around here... but sometimes....
 
Wil, when you "call them as you see them" you are casting stones. You can say what you want will but you're going to get just as nasty replies back for it. You want to understand, but it takes a lot of effort and sometimes we stumble, please try to recognise that in your posts.
 
When we discuss facts about what has happened I am not casting stones. Obama, the peace prize winner, overseeing thousands of innocent deaths in a dozen countries as judge jury and executioner... these things do not jive... it is hypocrisy...I point it out...I piss off democrats in the states..I am NOT casting stones at Democrats... I am pointing out an issue worth discussing.

Back to topic.... what is the definition to be utilized for 'cherry picker' that indicates someone...anyone doesn't cherry pick??
 
Perhaps we are stuck on the phrase 'cherry picking' because of its negative affiliation. I've been pondering this and would like to try the topic from a different perspective. Everyone has their own ideas, whether based on scholarship or personal opinion. Everyone chooses to accept that some of the Bible is metaphorical, some of it is actual history. Obviously everyone's opinion on which is the one and which is the other does not agree. Is not choosing what you as a person accepts as historical versus metaphorical 'cherry picking'? We each make a choice what we will accept. In this sense, seems to me that Wil is correct in his statement that everyone cherry picks.
 
wil said:
When we discuss facts about what has happened I am not casting stones. Obama, the peace prize winner, overseeing thousands of innocent deaths in a dozen countries as judge jury and executioner... these things do not jive... it is hypocrisy...I point it out...I piss off democrats in the states..I am NOT casting stones at Democrats... I am pointing out an issue worth discussing.
Click to expand...

Yes you are [change subject before you get a chance to answer]

wil said:
Back to topic.... what is the definition to be utilized for 'cherry picker' that indicates someone...anyone doesn't cherry pick??
Click to expand...

I still want a quote to work with, it all gets very abstract to me. I think I know a metaphor when I see it becuase it's a very specific literary technique. If I'm going to continue this discussion someone needs to prove me wrong.
 
Wikipedia - "The term is based on the perceived process of harvesting fruit, such as cherries. The picker would be expected to only select the ripest and healthiest fruits. An observer who only sees the selected fruit may thus wrongly conclude that most, or even all, of the fruit is in such good condition. A less common type of cherry picking is to gather only fruit that is easy to harvest ignoring quality fruit higher up the tree. This can also give observers a false impression about the quality of fruit on the tree."
 
I don't have a negative affiliation... I do read but not take the 'bad fruit' as literal. I don't support stoning of anyone.

Genesis, Revelation...many (here in the states) take them as literal... and through that deny evolution, used the bible to fight against slavery, women's rights, civil rights, and now homosexuality...

I do not cast stones at all democrats for Obama's failings, just as I don't blame all Republicans for Bush's failings. I do point out the hypocrisy of the men.

One of Thomas's pet peeves is that I was an asst scoutmaster in a majority Catholic scout troop, I witnessed repeatedly our need to pack up from camp early on Sunday morning so the Catholic boys could get to mass, an interfaith service "Scout's Own" was not acceptable, they must get to mass or they would go to hell... We heard it from parents, and children, for half a dozen years. Mentioning this fact is an afront to Thomas. He has enlightened me that this is not the Catholic Church that he knows and loves...I accept that...I've learned what is normal on this side of the pond is not normal to Thomas or the rest of the world. I respect that, and am not throwing stones at the church, but do have issues with the hierarchy here which puts children through these trials...

btw, thanx for those definitions...I see them as highly appropriate in our conversation. Tis just some folks like ripe cherries, some tart, some sweet, some yellow... we all pick the cherries we prefer... and obviously don't like others deeming what are the best cherries for us...
 
Devils' Advocate said:
Perhaps we are stuck on the phrase 'cherry picking' because of its negative affiliation.
Click to expand...

I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. To me, it does not amount to 'Cherry Picking' just because someone views a Biblical passage as Metaphorical rather than Historical Fact. How you categorize the passage is irrelevant. The point is do you consider it at all.
 
The stages of review of a passage to me are opening my two parallel bibles...one provides 4 translations/interpretations, the other 3 and a commentary...so I can see 7 different thoughts on the text... (could goto biblegateway and get 20....but seems 7 is enough).. I look at it literally...what does it litterally say in today's understanding? And then take a look the author, the time it was written and what was the political environment of the time, the disputes, the wars, and what side was the author on... trying to get a historical context. Was it an idiom (like hopefully nobody reads raining cats and dogs 2000 years from now and think we were infested by such a plague), is there deeper meanings in the words (Jews were big on emotional or alternate meanings to words, just check out the birth of every of the 12 tribes and the naming of those babies) Is it a dream sequence (revelation), a song or poem (psalms), a metaphor (genesis), a political op-ed (jonah)....

I believe every bible passage has use to me in my passage through time in this incarnation...and its meaning differs as my journey continues.
 
IMO anyone who does not take into consideration both the literal and metaphorical contexts is cherry-picking. With the Bible, this is almost a necessity. Hence the reason there are hundreds of denominations.

For instance. In the "Did Jesus proclaim to be God?" The answer literally speaking is no. He never says "I am God", nor "I am the Father", nor "I am the Creator". Now Someone else could say that when he proclaims "I and the Father are one" he is saying he is one in the same. OK, I can accept that as an answer, but it is not the only interpretation of the saying. And one of them is to be conjoined in a cause (of which Christians and Muslims agree at least for the most part) such as correcting the errors of men. If he truly submitted to "the Father's" will, he would indeed be "one" with the Father. This definition seems to fit his other statements during the trials and sequences leading up to the arrest. Him being God, the Father/Creator, means he spent a lot of effort trying to convince people he wasn't God, and praying to himself.

The above argument isn't meant to push my POV but rather that Cherry-picking is almost unavoidable. Either you take a verse and interpret it alone, or a chapter, or book, but in the end a book like the Bible is going to have verses/chapters that do not fit into any neat pile. And some would argue (although I disagree) that it is necessary with the Quran as well.
 
Here's the common understanding of 'cherry-picking' from wiki:
Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias. Cherry picking may be committed intentionally or unintentionally. This fallacy is a major problem in public debate.
Click to expand...
That's cherry-picking as I understand it.

The mark of good scholarly practice is that the scholar is not selective, but rather presents the various conflicting theses, and then traces the path to his or her conclusions. To say everyone cherrypicks is to say all science is a priori founded on a selective reading of the evidence.

So for that reason I can assert from experience that not everyone 'cherry-picks' according to the common definition of the term, which I reference above.
 
Hello Thomas. Glad to hear from you.
Seems like there is some "cherry picking" of the "cherry picking" (see post 31) as described by wiki.
A priori? Pure knowledge is one thing but speculating as to an interpretation is entirely different. Frequently that mimics "cherry picking".
 
wil said:
Who is it that doesn't cherry pick passages that support their thesis?
Click to expand...

Now that you mention it, I do 'Cherry Pick' on that basis from time to time. Although, it's usually because someone else demands it. I'll make a comment for instance and someone will ask where it says that in the Bible. Then I'll end up finding the passage or passages that support what I said.
 
Namaste Jesus said:
To me, it does not amount to 'Cherry Picking' just because someone views a Biblical passage as Metaphorical rather than Historical Fact. How you categorize the passage is irrelevant. The point is do you consider it at all.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's how I understand it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top