SunBow asked this question:
Why was King David so revered that he had to have the Messiah as a desendant?
My response was:
"Personal insecurity..."
The result - because WaterStreet considered the answer to be cynical it should not be considered an acceptabale answer so the question was moved to the Lounge. See:
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Other/Lounge/Q_23559313.html#a21996855My response to that was:
"Thanks Michael,
If you view my answer as cynical that is more a measure of how you judge me than the value of the answer. Leaders throughout history invariably do what they do because of personal insecurity. Thus I believe my response was valid and complete."
===
Now why should a simple, straightforward answer by branded as cynical and why should the Page Editor take it upon himself to be the arbitor in such matters. It looks to me that anyone who dares to make a comment on a religious matter and does not respond with a whole load of religious guff is now to be ignored and pushed-off to the Lounge.
Is it small wonder that the numbers of people are dwindling here in the Philosophy and Religion Area.
If someone disagrees with my original statement of "Personal insecurity...", in the original thread they of course were free to argue against it there. However to smother it because it's not liked as a comment is way outside the terms of discussion in P&R.
If that's how you want to conduct the P&R area WaterStreet, then you can count me out. I realise that you will breathe a sigh of relief that you will have got rid of one of the atheists as a contributor - if that's your objective then you are highly successful.
Comments and views from all on how discussions should be conducted here in P&R would be welcome.
I am offering only 20 points as in no way should this question be answered by those who are only here for the points.
Start Free Trial
