Favourite verses
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Have I ignored them? I don't make excuses, my friend. I find context. This is ancient literature we're dealing with. Whatever you say, it's a piece of ancient writing. Do you the goal of each individual book in the Bible? What's the purpose of Judges? or of Kings and Chronicles? Or of Exodus and Leviticus?
One can't read the book of Judges and say, "I'll make these people my role models!" Because Judges wasn't meant to be read that way. In fact, see Judges 21:25.
"In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes."
These people weren't following the laws. They simply did what they wanted. Kinda sounds familiar, right?
The reason I ask a priest or a person in authority is because I might be reading Psalms and be looking for the main character, or reading Genesis and thinking it's a science textbook. I might be reading the Bible in the wrong light. That's why I ask someone in authority.
I don't read genesis as a science book because I know it was written by man for control of another man, it was written in a time where people didn't understand human rights, it was written by people that had no clue about science.
The way you read genesis 1 and 2 then is what you think the people at the time decided on based on their science at the time and they got it wrong. Am I correct?
If I am, you are reading it like a science textbook. Just a really really old one. I have a science textbook at home that tells me that Pluto is a planet. That however is an actual science textbook. Genesis was never meant to be read as such.
No I read genesis as a fictional story that man told to fellow man in order to explain how the people at that time thought the world came to be. To me it holds no more water than the maya thinking people were made from maze!
And By the way you don't know how genesis was meant to be read either, no one does! Your church asserts how you should read it and just so you know many others secs of Christians would say your church is wrong! All you have is an appeal to authority, the problem is that your church is no authority in my eyes. You might hold them on a pedestal but to me they are gay men in dresses that like to fuck little boys... they are a vacuum that sucks the resources of everyone they come into contact with. They are a business, they need a constant flow of money to satisfy their greed, and they will stop at nothing in order to do it. They sell fear, the church is a bunch of hypocrites that would rather see the world burn then allow humanity to progress!
Actually some text in genesis give hints on how it’s to be understood. Kinda like how you know for sure how certain literature is poetry or essay or fiction.
You’re saying that all I have is an appeal to authority which doesn’t work. But let me ask you. Which church established (or recognized) the canon? Look back in histroy. A RCC called a council and it was decided in the late 4th century. As such, the RCC, for all it’s flaws, does have authority to interpret the Bible.
As to all your accusations about the RCC, I dunno what to say. It’s obviously just an attack on the institution to avoid the real issue. We can talk about those elsewhere. But this thread does just say “Favorite Verses”
Yes we know. It's meant to be read like a book of fiction.
precisely why it has to be confusing. There's no profit or power to be gained if you don't have control over your sheep.
Re: Chica and God confusing the languages...
Pretty sure Chica completely missed the whole point of that verse. *sigh*
There is NOTHING and I mean NOTHING of value in the bible ANY bible!
Really? Not even something from proverbs? A lot of atheists absolutely love the book written by Solomon, Ecclesiastes.
Nope, not psalms proverbs not any of it.
Not even Sirach 38 on what to do when someone is sick?
JoC, where is Sirach from? I couldn't find this in the bible.
Oh. I think Sirach is in the Deuterocanon. It's in my Bible.
Uh, I see. Thanks for clearing that up. I kept looking at the contents page thinking where is Sirach. Haha, lol
HelloWhatamIdoi...,
The book of Sirach is a part of the Apocrypha section of the Bible, like the Old & New Testaments. It was and is an integral part of the Bible, having been included since the Bible was first written in 692 A.D. Then, in the 1880s two English guys got a bug up their butts and deleted it from their Bible version. The Catholics told them to shove their version and kept the original Bible. So the Bible format that you use has only been in existence for about 132 years.
A couple of reasons why it was deleted was because of the cost to print it in the new revision and because the Baptists thought that the Apocrypha was a bunch of superstitious nonsense. In actuality I think it's the most interesting part of the Bible.
I can post a lot of relevant links if you are interested in real Bible history.
Thanks for this. My understanding however is that it was Martin Luther who placed them in the "Apocrypha section" saying they weren't inspired. It had been in the original canon and was always considered inspired since the 4th century and the "Apocrypha" was introduced like 500 years ago.
JoC,
The Apocrypha was an integral part of the original Bible written in 692 A.D. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Amiatinus
As such it was included in just about every version until the 1880s, when a couple of English guys tossed it. At that time the Protestants accepted the deletion but the Catholics kept it.
http://rockingodshouse.com/why-were-14-books-apocrypha-removed-from-the-...
Here's an article in the New York Times from May 27, 1883, about the Baptist Bible = http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9E05E2DB1431E433A25754... It's a PDF format so you have to scroll down the page to read the first column.
The Deuterocanon had always been part of the Christian canon since it was recognized in the fourth century. Martin Luther decided to remove them from the canon 500 years ago and moved them to the "Apocrypha" section of the printed bibles. The apocrypha was considered useful for study but not inspired.
The Catholics haven't removed or added anything since the end of the fourth century when the canon was established.
Psalm 38:7. Lo, I have a burning affliction in my loins!
Depending upon translation.
Lol. That's random
Such is usually true with verses that simply cut away from larger bits of anecdotes or explanations. I'm sure this one falls into that category.
Revelation 8-11:
And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.
I like that verse because it reminds me of all the spooky woo-woo garbage that polluted the airwaves after somebody noticed that the Russian for "Wormwood" is "Chernobyl."
The Bible has about 700K words. 99.99% of those words have absolutely no connection with reality, but the fact that one single word coincidentally matched a word that was in the news was seen as proof that the Bible is supernaturally inspired. That's seal shit.
Exodus 13:21. "By day the LORD went ahead of them in a column of smoke"
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
Bleh, I guess animated gifs don't play here. :(
Oh yes, the pillar of cloud and fire, one to keep the Hebrews cold and the other to keep them warm.
I like the versions that calls it a column of smoke better. Then it reminds me of a particular sentient column of smoke on a particular "special" island. Using that show's mythology, maybe that's how the Hebrews first heard of it.
And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord, and said, ‘If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, then whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return victorious from the Ammonites, shall be the Lord’s, to be offered up by me as a burnt-offering.’ Then Jephthah came to his home at Mizpah; and there was his daughter coming out to meet him with timbrels and with dancing. She was his only child; he had no son or daughter except her. When he saw her, he tore his clothes, and said, ‘Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low; you have become the cause of great trouble to me. For I have opened my mouth to the Lord, and I cannot take back my vow.’ (Judges 11:30-1, 34-5)
This actually does have a deep meaning to it. Be careful what you promise. Jephthah isn’t the best role models out there. Judges actually records the dark times of Israel’s sinfulness.
Pages