neither can agree on what "scripture" consists of
not a good basis for discussion
I am all for it.
yet it isn't about who 'wins' or who 'loses'.
it is about truth, and the only proofs lie outside the documents under discussion, in historic annals away from the documents, where a framing of truth might occur.
for those who didn't notice, Q recently asserted that context is an important discriminator.
i would suggest that without context, the truth is far easier to shade or manipulate - timestamps close down a lot of spurious debate and also reveal sequence.
the same will be needed for the discussion you propose.
but what is there in the way of material documents of the period?
And a responsibility - which many in the IC have simply forgotten and take for granted as eternally theirs.
yes - finding the truth after millenia is difficult in a world where there is profit and gain to be made hiding it.
I think looking at what drives people to kill when their own religious texts admonish against it is important.
the more one digs and looks about, the easier it is to discern who is the root cause of these things.
they are fairly easy to discern…
people cannot agree on the document composition.
as you point out, Titus is an issue.
killing is an issue.
looking at it contextually, many say the old parts should be dropped and ignored, because we are more 'civilized' and 'educated' - which is a division worm.
tolerance has been made into a virtue, which in many clearly illustrated instances results in worse things occurring.
animal sacrifice is yet another issue and one that was used to divide.
dilution by including all and division by excluding historical practice.
context is missing and yet necessary.
common sense is also required, and again missing yet necessary.
it will be a long, winding road…
you will know them by their works.
their actions clearly show what they truly are.
your digging will out them, though they squeal and point their fingers at everything else.
do it anon.