I've seen many arguments where one person quotes their holy text, and then someone from the other side will also quote something from the same text, for their own arguments, and often that derails the topic, for both sides will go on quoting without coming to an understanding more often than not. Why do people quote their holy texts? The validity is not accepted by every person on the planet, and due to the symbolism here and there and all over the place, each person interprets the same verse differently. It's more likely than not to derail whatever topic it is, and such discussions rarely go anywhere, mostly round and round in circles. So why do people do it?

Because it's the forum for it.

And because what you witness in that respect on these boards, is what you will witness if you ever attend a function wherein the faithful are in attendance. I've had occasion to do so and I'll tell you that in a room of 30 christians, you will never find any two persons that see their faith and the scriptures, the same way.

And why is that surprising!? If you read the holy texts of any faith you'll find contradictions. So how is it surprising that people quarrel over the import or meaning, behind them when they discuss the veracity among themselves!?

What I think lends to that which some may observe to be a contentious atmosphere, is that the faithful that enter into a dialog hold one of two platforms when they do so. They either feel they must defend their personal faith as if it/they are under attack, or must convert others to their way of thinking, and so they approach the thread as such. Because the faithful are under the impression that not believing, or being swayed from what they currently hold in understanding of their faith, threatens their soul.

A debate format would, prayerfully, afford a different atmosphere than the ones undertaken in the spirituality and religious forums.

I can't speak for people of other religious faiths, but for a CHristian, they believe the BIble to be the word of God. So when discussing their Faith, they appeal to the authority of the BIble. They attempt to show that what they are saying is not their "opinion" on what will happen, but in fact the words of God Himself, written down for humanity. It's similar to a scientist quoting another scientist's findings to support his own conclusion, or an historian quoting a prominent archaeologist in speaking about a place or event.

Some might argue that the reason for quoting scripture is because Christians can't think for themselves and so they parrot off some tired apologetic passages. I'm not going to go as far as to say this never happens, but I believe for most (for me, at least) the reason is as stated as above.

THe problem with this is that non-Christians don't believe the Bible to be the word of God, and far from being impressed at the words of God, they are in fact annoyed that these people are trying to push their brand of "Faith" onto other people.

For this reason, I try my best not to quote the Bible, except when directly responding to another Bible verse, either to clarify a concept, or to point out a reference, or to clarify (what I see as) a biblical misconception.

Regards, PA

That pretty much sums it up. I would also add that in this kind of setting (internet, where everyone can be someone else and ego can run wild) a lot of it is just to prove they can, makes the poster feel more important.

No offence to anyone here....but when I have made a few questions or comments..and had others post replies to me...quoting the bible to me...verse after verse....i simply ignore it all...I dont believe in the bible...everyone that knows me...KNOWS that I dont...yet some still post me verses..and therefore I skip out their posts

All very good, but quoting holy texts, unless the debate is about the holy text itself, leads nowhere. I'm just wondering why people do it.

The problem with quoting any religious text is that what can be accepted on faith alone can also be rejected on faith alone. A stance must be supported with evidence and sound reasoning or it is just so much hot air. If you can't test a wild idea, then all you have is a wild idea. If you can test it, you can at least determine whether it is true.

--DJS

I don't mean to offend, but at points, arguing, and adding "proof" to that..with quotes, what else?! serves a purpose...that of re-inforcing a belief of the person who issued it in the firtst place...

simpler said, sometimes the only person one needs--and sets out-- to convince is him/her-self..thus, engaging in a debate and being able to quote --proof of extended knowledge, right? -- from some sources makes one master of one's domain ...except, of course, the lucky cases where the people involved in a debate are really willing to learn from each other, and not only in need of re-assuring