Bible a waste of space?

[logician]

Why wouldn't you?

There are many people who don't love themselves, so Jesus's teaching could not apply to them.

 

[FerventGodSeeker]

Cute. However, it's the beleif in god that creates atheists not the actual existance of one.

That's a lovely opinion...I'll still stick to mine.

No my approach at the moment isn't quite enough. Any and all theories, ideas, and morals must be written and observed in a coherant matter unchangable and understandable. If this is not so than no theory, idea, or moral is going to hold any relevance in a real-life situation. This is most likely why the bible was created and a multiple variety of other books. If I were to answer my own question I would say that the bible is not a waste of space but it is poorly fulfilling its purpose

What is the Bible's purpose?

and, therefore, I/we need to find something better. But I didn't start this thread to hear what I have to say. I want to know: Do you think the bible is necessary for a moral society? If not, what is? If not, why do we bother with it? Why is it the most sold book in the world? Why do so many people attempt to translate it in language and rationalization?

Probably because it's been so life-altering for so many...you can't ignore something that is so powerful.

 

[sojourner]

When one takes on religion, logic exits stage left.

How so?

 

[sojourner]

There are many people who don't love themselves, so Jesus's teaching could not apply to them.

That didn't answer my question. Why wouldn't people love themselves? Because they're poor, or oppressed, or weak, or unable to "keep up," or downtrodden, or imprisoned, or disenfranchised, or degraded, or they have no hope, or what? Jesus speaks to all these aspects of the human condition, and more.

We have to start somewhere. Jesus was concerned mainly with those who were the outcasts, and he spoke hope to them.

Why wouldn't people love themselves?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What if you don't love yourself?

If you don't love yourself, you're not a properly functioning human being and you need help.

 

[Anti-World]

That's a lovely opinion...I'll still stick to mine.

That wasn't an opinion but if you don't think I'm right than go talk to some atheists about it. They are atheists because they beleive people who beleive in god are self-delusional. Atheism is based on the opposition of theistic beleif. There's really no contradicting that as far as I know but I would be interested if you can.

What is the Bible's purpose?

If you actually read my other replies you would already know what I think of the bible. However I'll do a short recap:

The bible was probably created by a group of people with the intent of keeping order to mankind.
The bible was written in a way that makes it actually marketable to the human race in order to achieve their goal.

 

[sojourner]

That wasn't an opinion but if you don't think I'm right than go talk to some atheists about it. They are atheists because they beleive people who beleive in god are self-delusional. Atheism is based on the opposition of theistic beleif. There's really no contradicting that as far as I know but I would be interested if you can.



If you actually read my other replies you would already know what I think of the bible. However I'll do a short recap:

The bible was probably created by a group of people with the intent of keeping order to mankind.
The bible was written in a way that makes it actually marketable to the human race in order to achieve their goal.

Actually, one of my best friends is an atheist. (He thinks I'm deluding myself, but that's not why he's an atheist.) He is an atheist because he does not believe God exists. Your statement is opinion (which you're entitled to), and we are entitled to refute it.

Actually, the Bible was written so that we could have written record of humanity's relationship with God. It wasn't conspiracy, or a power play, or anything else that would make a good Hollywood blockbuster. It isn't a textbook. It isn't a tool for wielding public control. It doesn't "tell us what to do." It's simply the written record of our relationship with God.

I can understand why you have a problem with it, if you're approaching it with one (or more) of these misconceptions. Personally, if I read "Moby Dick" and approached it as a manual for how to fix my "73 Chevy Vega, I would think it was a piece of crap, too.

 

[Anti-World]

Ahem... Alrighty. Make me repeat myself.
You're freind beleives god doesn't exist.
You beleive God does exist.
They are opposing viewpoints.

His beleif that god does not exist can only be in place because there is a group of people (Like you) called theists who beleive god does exist. At any rate, Atheism exists because of the beleif in God, not because of the actual existence of one. Thus countering you're quote, "If there were no God then there would be no Atheists."

Go 'head and ask your freind if he would even bother beleiving that there isn't a God if the whole proposition that God exists wasn't ever brought up.


Also. How do you know what the intentions were when the bible was created? You don't, I don't. I'm supposing based on only its actual effect not on its past. The bible might be a history of our relationship with God. That's certainly one of the topics. However, that could have been written simply to persuade people (Like you) to follow the moral standards which are an actual reality. They could be using a lie for the greater good. No matter what the bible is ingenious.

 

[sojourner]

How do you know what the intentions were when the bible was created? You don't, I don't. I'm supposing based on only its actual effect not on its past. The bible might be a history of our relationship with God. That's certainly one of the topics. However, that could have been written simply to persuade people (Like you) to follow the moral standards which are an actual reality. They could be using a lie for the greater good. No matter what the bible is ingenious.

Scholarship and study go a long way toward dispelling our misconceptions about Biblical literature.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

"Bible a waste of space?"

Pshaw! It's literature, man, literature! Without the Bible we wouldn't have Noah's Arc, the Four Horsemen, or the story of Jesus. (At least, as we know them.)

As a peice of literature, its value is priceless.

 

[lilithu]

No, I don't "beleive that quote" it's a fact. Plain and simple.

Actually, it's no more than your opinion.

As for your OP, you display an extremely simplistic view of the bible AND religion. Yes, you could write you're own version and it would be much more straight forward and no one except you would care. The bible is metaphor and myth. The bible is poetry. You're criticizing it for not being a dictionary.

 

[logician]

If you don't love yourself, you're not a properly functioning human being and you need help.

There are many people that have don't love themselves but can "function" in this world. Jesus never existed. BTW, the writers of the gospels(unknown) simply were rehashing well known teachings from previous religious thought and other philosphies.

 

[sojourner]

People who don't love themselves, by-and-large commit suicide, become hopelessly embroiled in drug use, become invovlved with prostitution, and engage in other self-degrading activity that seriously hampers their ability to function well in society.

BTW: Prove Jesus never existed, and learn a little theology before you make such grandiose statements as you last one.

 

[logician]

People who don't love themselves, by-and-large commit suicide, become hopelessly embroiled in drug use, become invovlved with prostitution, and engage in other self-degrading activity that seriously hampers their ability to function well in society.

BTW: Prove Jesus never existed, and learn a little theology before you make such grandiose statements as you last one.

It's the person who asserts the postive that must prove their claim. I have seen no hard evidence whatsoever that a man fitting the description of the biblical jesus ever existed. Please present such proof.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

It's the person who asserts the postive that must prove their claim. I have seen no hard evidence whatsoever that a man fitting the description of the biblical jesus ever existed. Please present such proof.

You have to admit, even if he didn't exist, he had one heck of an impact on the world.

 

[logician]

You have to admit, even if he didn't exist, he had one heck of an impact on the world.

So has Bush, who unfortunately exists.

 

[Anti-World]

Actually, it's no more than your opinion.

As for your OP, you display an extremely simplistic view of the bible AND religion. Yes, you could write you're own version and it would be much more straight forward and no one except you would care. The bible is metaphor and myth. The bible is poetry. You're criticizing it for not being a dictionary.

Oh I love that. Absolutely love that. I don't think I've ever been more complimented. My whole entire goal is to be simplistic. I have also previously stated a way that the bible could be a metaphor (If you would have bothered to read my other posts). So here you are trying to start a debate with me about something I agree with.

If you want some of the rediculously complex theories you should go talk to some of the catholics. People have an absolutely amazing ability to rationalize anything to make it go their way. I am offering a simple view based on only effects of the bible (An observable factor). The bible isn't just simply poetry, I'm afraid, people have fought and died for the ideas that it proclaims. People base their entire lives on it. I can't help but to laugh that you call me simple but you can't see that.

If someone is basing anything of anything it's got to be based on fact: Like a dictionary. If no one based their faith off of the bible I would no more critisize in than a dr. suess novel.

I don't have any intention of writing a bible. I don't have the motivation to do so.


And what is with you people and saying: "that's your opinion". Does that make you feel better? No, don't bother to tell me why its my opinion just say, "That is your opinion!" Ya, that's a logical approach to a situation. Please, if you are going to accuse me of something, tell me why.

I am going to say this for (Hopefully) the final time. "Without a God there would be no Atheists" is a false statement. The statement is true if I were to say, "Without the beleif in God there would be no Atheists". If no one, anywhere ever mentioned a God (Even if he existed) there would be no reason for an Atheist to exist. Also if there wasn't a God and people beleived there were than an Atheist can still exist. ATHEIST'S EXISTING IS NOT CAUSED BY A GOD. If that is just way too complicated for anyone to understand, I give up. :faint:

 

[Anti-World]

It's the person who asserts the postive that must prove their claim. I have seen no hard evidence whatsoever that a man fitting the description of the biblical jesus ever existed. Please present such proof.

Did it ever occur to you that most of the records in Jerusalem were wiped out shortly after Jesus' death due to invading nations? Also, the surviving histories from around that time period never mentioned that Jesus didn't exist. (Forgive me because I'm terrible at remembering names) Even in texts that denounced Jesus he was never said to not exist.

Think carefully before you decide to make a completely unfounded statement.

 

[Anti-World]

Josephus was one historical writer after that time period and Jerusalem was pretty much completely destroyed in 70 A.D. There's some facts.

 

[lilithu]

Oh I love that. Absolutely love that. I don't think I've ever been more complimented. My whole entire goal is to be simplistic. I have also previously stated a way that the bible could be a metaphor (If you would have bothered to read my other posts). So here you are trying to start a debate with me about something I agree with.

Feeling complimented about being called simplistic, lovely. You and George Bush must be great pals... except when you argue about the bible.

I am responding to exactly what I said I was responding to, your original post (and to the title of your thread). I am not obligated to read all the rest of your posts on the off chance that you might have reversed your position later on. And at any rate, even if you do agree that the bible is metaphor, you seem to comprehend no purpose for that. So our disagreement still stands, and I still think your view overly simplistic.

As for the rest of your rant about "opinion" and the definition of "atheist" I said nothing about those things. Who is trying to pick an argument with whom?