If Wahabbism’s literalism is deplorable then it’s because they’ve demolished most of medieval Mecca because it dates the Prophet.
It’s on a par with Mussolini’s bull-dozering of medieval Rome to make way for his recreation of long, straight imperial roads.

Okay… that’s not true by any means, but it does bother me.

[b]That[/b] was an impressive display of historical knowledge that, I can only admit, flew straight over the top of my head like a missile.

I guess if you’re going to follow a [holy] text, there’s more respect and - ironically - reason in literalism than in the typical selection and conscious self-censorship of the religious moderates… until, as you say, you reach the point of destroying evidence of that literal truth’s falsehood…

Thanks :)

I don’t know about there being more respect… It’s more honest and integral(?) I suppose, but any respect they’ gain, will be tempered according to the other beliefs they take literally.
While I tend to feel a degree of respect for people that believe Genesis for truth, because of the integrity of their belief, if they also believe everything Leviticus says is true, then I’ll find it difficult to maintain that.
Maybe that’s my issue; double standards, hypocrisy and so on. Perhaps if I cared more about evolution, I may have a different opinion of creationist beliefs

I’m the opposite - perhaps because I find Genesis just as ludicrous as Leviticus? In fact more so, since Genesis is a collection of wild stories (difficult to believe) whereas Leviticus is a collection of wild rules (difficult to follow - but no suspension of disbelief required). Somebody who claims they believe The Bible and pays attention to Leviticus as well as Genesis is at least consistent - I would say that someone who claims to believe The Bible but doesn’t follow the rules set down in Leviticus are either ignorant, apathetic or insincere…