Ignorance and the Bible

[Cypress]

Agreed. Parables and stories are not lies anymore than Aesop's Fables are a lie. Additionally, some ancient texts, especially the Bible, are more than a religious text. It was often the only book/scrolls possessed by a tribe or village and, therefore gave guidance not in just religion and morality but health (diet) and legal codes.

Immature atheists and other religious haters or abusers refuse to see the overall picture of what life was like in those days. They cherry-pick only the parts that support their narrow POV.

That's a good point.
The Torah is certainly chock full of civil laws, ritual codes, and dietary requirements.

I don't think I am ever going too really understand what all the stories in the Hebrew Bible are supposed to mean, because I would have go read the Gemara and the Midrash for the complete interpretation.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

That's a good point.
The Torah is certainly chock full of civil laws, ritual codes, and dietary requirements.

I don't think I am ever going too really understand what all the stories in the Hebrew Bible are supposed to mean, because I would have go read the Gemara and the Midrash for the complete interpretation.

As you've pointed out before, the teenage atheists get wrapped around the axle over bits and pieces in the Bible cherry-picked out of the Bible without understanding, or even trying to understand, the context of the situation 2000 to 4000 years ago.

As you and I have discussed before, human beings haven't changed mentally much less physically in the past 10,000+ years. Ancient wisdom gathered over the centuries can be as relevant today as back then. The main changes would through advanced knowledge of medicine and diet along with more sophisticated social changes. In short, it's okay to eat shellfish and pork under certain conditions, we shouldn't be killing adulterers versus simply taking them to court and, of course, "No Kings".

 

[Cypress]

As you've pointed out before, the teenage atheists get wrapped around the axle over bits and pieces in the Bible cherry-picked out of the Bible without understanding, or even trying to understand, the context of the situation 2000 to 4000 years ago.

As you and I have discussed before, human beings haven't changed mentally much less physically in the past 10,000+ years. Ancient wisdom gathered over the centuries can be as relevant today as back then. The main changes would through advanced knowledge of medicine and diet along with more sophisticated social changes. In short, it's okay to eat shellfish and pork under certain conditions, we shouldn't be killing adulterers versus simply taking them to court and, of course, "No Kings".

Completely agree.

There is a certain cadre of people who point at the creation story in Genesis and roar with laughter.

But Genesis 1 seems clearly to be Hebrew poetry based on the cadence and syntax of the passages.

At the level of poetry and metaphor, Genesis is actually a pretty decent rendering of the creation of the universe, life, and everything.

 

[gmark77]

There is a certain cadre of people who point at the creation story in Genesis and roar with laughter.

You act as if there hasn't been significant amount of court battles in the USA that had to forestall this very thing from being forced into science classes.

That's strange to me. It's like you missed the 1980's, 1990s, and early 2000's.

We all understand it is poetry. Why do you think we don't? We push back against it being treated like literal science.

Why do you seem to be unbothered by this?

Creation and evolution in public education in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Ross Dolan]

Agreed. As our 12 year old atheist keeps doing, cherry-picking the Bible is a favorite activity of religious fanatics be they atheist or theist. Even obviously secular fanatics like White Nationalists cherry-pick the parts that suit their agenda without considering the context of the entire document.

Absolutely!

 

[Margot]

Perhaps you should explain the book of Job to us.

You can't read?

 

[Margot]

You’re unaware of that passage or merely wish to ignore the truth of it?

"You can't handle the truth"

 

[gmark77]

You can't read?

I can and I already explained my stand on the book of Job.

 

[Margot]

Completely agree.

There is a certain cadre of people who point at the creation story in Genesis and roar with laughter.

But Genesis 1 seems clearly to be Hebrew poetry based on the cadence and syntax of the passages.

At the level of poetry and metaphor, Genesis is actually a pretty decent rendering of the creation of the universe, life, and everything.

Obviously Genesis is the Cliff Notes of creation! YHWH easily could have gone into more detail and a timeline!
Genesis goes from Creation to Noah's flood in record time.

I can and I already explained my stand on the book of Job.

Thanks for your opinion

 

[domer76]

"You can't handle the truth"

Non answer. Why are you so hesitant? Are you unaware of the wager on Job or does it merely make you uncomfortable.

I stated the truth. YHWH made a series of wager’s with Job suffering the consequences. Seems like you can’t handle the truth.

Back to the origin of YHWH. You weren’t aware he was merely a second tier storm god, were you? That’s what I mean about atheists being better informed if your deity than you are.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

You can't read?

He's 12.

 

[domer76]

Agreed. As our 12 year old atheist keeps doing, cherry-picking the Bible is a favorite activity of religious fanatics be they atheist or theist. Even obviously secular fanatics like White Nationalists cherry-pick the parts that suit their agenda without considering the context of the entire document.

When one claims the Bible to be the inerrant word of God, then every book, every story, every word is on the table.

The synoptic gospels have 2 contradictory birth narratives and more contradictory death stories. Now, since major holidays and holy days are recognized in this country, selecting those two is hardly cherry picking.

In the OT, a MAJOR story - the Exodus, never occurred. The several disasters set upon Egypt by YHWH never happened. The Great Flood never happened. Adam and Eve? LOL

The contexts of the entire documents (plural) is that they were written by ignorant individuals over a period of several centuries. They all had an agenda. A HUMAN agenda. Nothing more. Nothing less.

No real lessons to be learned that one can not learn without a deity.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

When one claims the Bible to be the inerrant word of God, then every book, every story, every word is on the table.

The synoptic gospels have 2 contradictory birth narratives and more contradictory death stories. Now, since major holidays and holy days are recognized in this country, selecting those two is hardly cherry picking.

In the OT, a MAJOR story - the Exodus, never occurred. The several disasters set upon Egypt by YHWH never happened. The Great Flood never happened. Adam and Eve? LOL

The contexts of the entire documents (plural) is that they were written by ignorant individuals over a period of several centuries. They all had an agenda. A HUMAN agenda. Nothing more. Nothing less.

No real lessons to be learned that one can not learn without a deity.

Cherry-picking. How many Christians believe the Bible is "the inerrant word of God"? Hint: 20%*

Only a fucking moron can't see the inconsistencies in the Bible and only fucking morons get in a snit about it. Your little 12-year-old fellow atheist is one of them.

*https://news.gallup.com/poll/394262/fewer-bible-literal-word-god.aspx
A record-low 20% of Americans now say the Bible is the literal word of God, down from 24% the last time the question was asked in 2017, and half of what it was at its high points in 1980 and 1984. Meanwhile, a new high of 29% say the Bible is a collection of "fables, legends, history and moral precepts recorded by man." This marks the first time significantly more Americans have viewed the Bible as not divinely inspired than as the literal word of God. The largest percentage, 49%, choose the middle alternative, roughly in line with where it has been in previous years.

 

[gmark77]

The synoptic gospels have 2 contradictory birth narratives and more contradictory death stories. Now, since major holidays and holy days are recognized in this country, selecting those two is hardly cherry picking.

The two genealogies of Jesus are a stark reminder that even by the NT there's some "confusion" about the actual narrative. Does Joseph need to be connected somehow to David? If so why does it matter since Joseph wasn't in any way involved in Jesus' birth? But more importantly why are there two DIFFERENT genealogies?

I know that folks like Cypress are going to whine that this is too "in the weeds" or too nit-picky as opposed to the resurrection narrative in the same books that he takes as gospel (no pun intended), but in reality it is critical. If one part of the books is in question then why are others not? And it sounds like the only differentiator is "which one is most important to preserve for the sanctity of the faith"?

The contexts of the entire documents (plural) is that they were written by ignorant individuals over a period of several centuries. They all had an agenda. A HUMAN agenda. Nothing more. Nothing less.

^^^QFT^^^^^

Which makes me curious why some people get so upset when someone calls out some of the silliness in the documents.

No real lessons to be learned that one can not learn without a deity.

Again, agreed. There is a lot of cool insights into human behavior in the Bible. But that doesn't mean one requires the Bible to know that, for instance, you can know someone by the fruit they bear. Etc

 

[gmark77]

Only a fucking moron can't see the inconsistencies in the Bible and only fucking morons get in a snit about it. Your little 12-year-old fellow atheist is one of them.

5 Battles in the War Between Creationism and Evolution

Major milestones in the more than 100-year-long debate between evolution and creationism

www.livescience.com

 

[Margot]

Non answer. Why are you so hesitant? Are you unaware of the wager on Job or does it merely make you uncomfortable.

I stated the truth. YHWH made a series of wager’s with Job suffering the consequences. Seems like you can’t handle the truth.

Back to the origin of YHWH. You weren’t aware he was merely a second tier storm god, were you? That’s what I mean about atheists being better informed if your deity than you are.

I have no problem with Job,he ended up better than when he started!
I'm sorry YHWH doesn't operate how you think he should!

 

[Margot]

He's 12.

I could read at 12

 

[domer76]

The two genealogies of Jesus are a stark reminder that even by the NT there's some "confusion" about the actual narrative. Does Joseph need to be connected somehow to David? If so why does it matter since Joseph wasn't in any way involved in Jesus' birth? But more importantly why are there two DIFFERENT genealogies?

I know that folks like Cypress are going to whine that this is too "in the weeds" or too nit-picky as opposed to the resurrection narrative in the same books that he takes as gospel (no pun intended), but in reality it is critical. If one part of the books is in question then why are others not? And it sounds like the only differentiator is "which one is most important to preserve for the sanctity of the faith"?






^^^QFT^^^^^

Which makes me curious why some people get so upset when someone calls out some of the silliness in the documents.



Again, agreed. There is a lot of cool insights into human behavior in the Bible. But that doesn't mean one requires the Bible to know that, for instance, you can know someone by the fruit they bear. Etc

Just not the genealogies. Mary and Joseph were placed in Bethlehem in two contradictory ways. One of which was historically impossible. They then left Bethlehem in two different manners. The Bethlehem narrative is also concocted, as it was written merely to fulfill OT prophecy. Jesus was from Nazareth, almost certainly. Not Bethlehem. And Joseph was his father, that is, unless someone else knocked up Mary.

 

[domer76]

I have no problem with Job,he ended up better than when he started!
I'm sorry YHWH doesn't operate how you think he should!

His fucking kids were murdered. How can you say he was better off?

YHWH, your second tier storm god, made wagers on righteous people’s lives with the devil. And you worship such as god. Pathetic.

 

[gmark77]

I have no problem with Job,he ended up better than when he started!

So then it's OK if God wished to "play a game" with Job's life? So long as he got something better?

How does that not reflect poorly on God?

I'm sorry YHWH doesn't operate how you think he should!

But per Job he DOES operate in a way we intensely wish he COULDN'T.