The compromise of literal religion: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/kJGxVeQw3SE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Buy her the book "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Erhman. If she refuses the information, then that's up to her. But if she accepts it, she'll see how 1 Timothy 2:12 has been verified to have been added later by scribes, as the earliest versions of the text don't include it. This book will help her see that the Bible is not innerant; and that she doesn't need to abide by medieval thinking in order to be free of sin. I think that's the biggest thing with ultra-religious people, they think challenging the views of their community is sinful - so they stick with the herd they were raised in due to this guilt and fear when they don't even realize how tight of a grip it has on them.
In my experience, that is an unusual group of religious people you know. The vast majority of folks I know are religious. They are generally gainfully employed and have been for many years. They are generally well educated and are able to express their views on subjects intelligently, thoughtfully and respectfully. They are generally happily married and have been for many years. The only unusual one I know relatively well is my daughter-in-law's step father. He is one of the "Carl Everett" (there were no dinosaur) types, but even at that, he respects my views and beliefs.
That they've found older manuscripts that don't have a passage doesn't mean it wasn't in the original. A scribe could have neglected/refused to include a sentence from the source he was copying, but a later one faithfully included it and the original was lost. Besides that, putting on my mystic hat for a second, that a part of the Bible was added later doesn't preclude it from being inerrant. Besides, beliefs around the role of women in the church is built on more than one passage. Anyway, for someone who believes in the ierrancy of the Bible, you can't just poke out that block. The whole thing would collapse without it. (And, finally, being free of sin isn't even in the theology of most all Christian denominational theologies.)
I don't think people respect views they find delusional or damning, they are just polite enough not to call people stupid to their faces or experienced enough to know it will cause fights, hard feelings and complicate relations. If someone was a 'flat Earther' you wouldn't think gosh, he's really thought about this and the facts to him appear that the Earth is flat. No, you'd just think to yourself, dumbass. But if you had to work with him or he was married to your daughter you wouldn't say it out loud. Which leads to something Mr. Jillete says above, in our society today where' Christian' is the norm, people will publicly lie about their personal beliefs to appear non-controversial and not be discriminated against. It's probably more likely to be elected as a gay candidate in 2012 than a non-theist one.
Read the book. Look at the evidence. You're right in saying that the earliest versions of the Bible were lost, but ALL of the oldest manuscripts that we have do not include this verse. Then... after a certain point of time, the verse starts to get added in and accepted. It's interesting to say the least. But anyways, like I said - you can read a number of books and study the evidence that they discuss for yourself and you'll see that the Bible was heavily influenced by human writers. As an atheist, I would say completely, but I'll let you make the call. Another good book is "Scribal Culture" by Karel van der Toorn.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jkIj94yepfU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I think there's a difference between respecting someone's beliefs (i.e., finding them plausible/reasonable) and respecting someone's right to their beliefs. People often confuse the two.
People are self righteous and judgmental in general. They are selfish, arrogant and cruel. They lie and backstab. They gossip and cheat. They are sarcastic and prejudice. They are political and social by nature whether they know it or not. These character traits are uniquely Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Atheist/Agnostic/Jewish/etc/etc/etc.
Exactly, I respect each person's right to their own beliefs, but the beliefs themselves I don't have much respect for. DD
I don't respect their beliefs, and I don't respect their rights to their beliefs if they choose some stupid discriminatory creed they inflict on others, especially children. Only my empathy for the human condition allows me to let people choose their own happiness without my disdain. That and the fact that I don't have a better solution to offer.
Funny thing is if we take a look at whats been said in the Bible, westboros are probably God's favourite children. Ive always had problems hanging out with people with strong beliefs, they can't keep their religions to themselves and Ive been asked millions of times by religious people " Oh No you don't believe in God?" You cant talk to them about their religion, you can't doubt their beliefs, you cant ask legit questions without pissing them off. But when they try to convert you, they are trying to help you. At the same time Religious based organizations (Church) money for teaching something based on faith, which they cant prove. They don't pay taxes , build mega churches and give you some loose change then all of a sudden they are the nice ones. "I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms." (Albert Einstein, obituary in New York Times, 19 April 1955) Religion is the worst thing ever happened to mankind.
Totally wrong, just because you don't know doesnt mean its right to pick a side without thinking. The beauty of "I don't know" is that I will keep trying hard to find out, instead of believing some book written in bronzeage.
A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. Deuteronomy 22:13-21 Yes I can quote bible too
