“All censorship exist to prevent anyone from challenging current conceptions and existing institutions. All progress is initiated by challenging current conceptions, and executed by supplanting existing institutions. Consequently, the first condition of progress is the removal of censorship.”
George Bernard Shaw
So I landed on Colostrom’s blog and I find a healthy discussion going on. And I ask myself why heathens bother to engage with him and his crowd of Jesus freaks. He writes in a response to Peter,
Puzzled Peter in light of your own words of doubt. People young in the faith visit this blog, and your post, as do many others, create more questions than provide food. This is one reason many ‘depart’ the faith, because of half truths and not being grounded in scripture. It only takes a morsel to make a feast of doubt. I’m not too fond of providing the table setting.
which in essence means any questions that arouse doubt are almost unwelcome if not entirely.
And shortly afterwards in the same thread he writes
Your comment seems strangely familiar as aligning with others who say Moses was a fraud, and this site does not promote the unbelief, attack, and overall vitriol toward the Jews and the scriptures. I have no interest in helping others in their leap from faith to unbelief.
If faith is valuable, it should be obvious why your comment went to the trash.
but elsewhere he has written
Please know that the merits of scripture need no defense.
which would imply that even against such doubt being raised, scripture would not need defending for it can stand on its own against such assault.
So which is it? And why would scripture be treated as immune to challenge?
I will however be quick to point out my comments haven’t suffered the indignity of having editor’s note attached to them, so far, nor are they under moderation. If his interest is seeking truth as he purports, I don’t think that truth is to be found between Genesis 1.1 and Revelation 22:21.