But the churches we are discussing can in fact provide those interpretations. Both A and B.brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Thu Mar 01, 2018 9:13 pm
Not worried about people lying about their own beliefs, or even making conspiratorial claims about the secret beliefs of others, more about provable things.
I would go so far as to require them to provide footnote style references and declaimers like secular companies have to do when they make claims.
For example, if they say "the Bible says X*" they should have to follow with "*Based on our interpretation of John 6:12" just as a secular organization has to say "*based on some studies which suggest more people X than Y" or whatever.
Then people can fact check it themselves and understand fully the claim being made.
It is not a lie to say homosexuality is a sin. It is also not a lie to say that Jesus forgives all sinners who ask for it, so the case could be made both that
1. Being gay will send you to hell. God finds it detestable. (The whole Leviticus nonsense) Not being against gays means you are for being gay, which will lead you to hell.
2. As long as you ask for forgiveness, you can be gay and go to heaven. Even if you sin daily.
While I am certainly no fan of Islam, they found a way to try and settle confilicts in their holy book(s) -abrogation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naskh_%28tafsir%29
Christians have no such doctrine, so the belief on what is true depends on the person who reads it, interprets it, and who they learned their interpretation from.
It would be nearly impossible, and a waste of both money and time to try and legislate against religious lying in 99% of cases.
Now if a priest tells his parishioners that it say in the bible that they should all allow their young sons to live with the priest, for reasons, then yes, that is a lie that cannot be defended by the bible. Church A vs. Church B is just a differing of interpretations, some of which are a thousand years old.