>>>So...would you place yourseld in the "Fanatic" columns? Do you "truly believe" in your position? If you admitted you were wrong would you then also have to admit you were wrong about a lot of aspects of your life?
>>
>>>Just curious why I'd be called a fanatic for holding to a belief...seems that would be a desirable trait...
>>
>>No, I would not put myself in that category. However, at the risk of being offensive, you appear to blindly accept what is in the Bible without question. That, to me, smacks of fanaticism. It rejects the possibility of any other theories or beliefs being valid, purely on the basis of a book composed by men, shaped to suit the purpose of a state-mandated religion. Lately I've been reading a lot on the early days of the Catholic Church, and it is quite disturbing.
>
>No offense taken.
>
>I have questioned the Bible and continue to do so even to this day. I think your lumping me in with others who do not take the time to understand and study (let alone read) their Bibles. I am not Catholic - and - I agree that the Catholic system is quite disturbing even today.
>
>I'm just puzzled at people who are offended by someone who has spent literally years studying his beliefs and knows why he believes them and is able defend his beliefs. Why that's offensive, I don't understand.
>
>Oh well - there are lots of things I don't understand...

I'm not sure I agree that saying to yourself that you don't understand some aspect of the Bible and working at it until you feel you do is really the same thing as 'questioning' it. Questioning requires a degree of skepticism, and as far as the Bible is concerned, I don't get the feeling that at least for you, skepticism is a part of the process.