If the Bible is so primitive, why can't Historians come up with their own Bible?

[Justme1981]

The closest Philosopher who attempted to write a Bible is Nietzsche with his Thus Spake Zarathustra. Good luck living by it.

But since the Bible was written hundreds of thousands of years ago, no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible. Well, we can be honest and look to Herodotus The Histories or Maybe Thucydides the Pelopenesian War, but really having read them in college neither gets close. Nietzche was the closest in his cynical way.

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible? You may write, "because the Bible is untrue," well wouldn't it make sense, if that is your argument, to turn recorded events into teachable moments? There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

So, discuss. Atheists, where are your great minds that they cannot achieve such a simple goal? (sarcasm and irony noted)

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

The closest Philosopher who attempted to write a Bible is Nietzsche with his Thus Spake Zarathustra. Good luck living by it.

But since the Bible was written hundreds of thousands of years ago, no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible. Well, we can be honest and look to Herodotus The Histories or Maybe Thucydides the Pelopenesian War, but really having read them in college neither gets close. Nietzche was the closest in his cynical way.

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible? You may write, "because the Bible is untrue," well wouldn't it make sense, if that is your argument, to turn recorded events into teachable moments? There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

So, discuss. Atheists, where are your great minds that they cannot achieve such a simple goal? (sarcasm and irony noted)

What criteria beyond confirmation bias are you using to determine other classical texts don't 'get close' to the Bible?

 

[Justme1981]

What criteria beyond confirmation bias are you using to determine other classical texts don't 'get close' to the Bible?

Show not tell, cite them. The Bible is by far the number 1 selling book. I don't see people put their hand over Nietzsche, Herodotus, Thucydides, being sworn in to high offices. Nor do I see any other book put in so many Hotel rooms and Hospitals. If that book existed it would have resonated by now. It hasn't.

You may say I have confirmation bias to psychoanalzy me but in reality confirmation bias is a myth. Please, keep pop psychology to a minimum. Let's discuss.

So, cite them.

 

[David T]

"written hundreds of thousands of years ago"

I am always fascinated by gawd awful singers complaining about people who are horrid singers. Is it a diversion.?i have no idea.

 

[sojourner]

The closest Philosopher who attempted to write a Bible is Nietzsche with his Thus Spake Zarathustra. Good luck living by it.

But since the Bible was written hundreds of thousands of years ago, no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible. Well, we can be honest and look to Herodotus The Histories or Maybe Thucydides the Pelopenesian War, but really having read them in college neither gets close. Nietzche was the closest in his cynical way.

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible? You may write, "because the Bible is untrue," well wouldn't it make sense, if that is your argument, to turn recorded events into teachable moments? There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

So, discuss. Atheists, where are your great minds that they cannot achieve such a simple goal? (sarcasm and irony noted)

First of all, the Bible isn’t a “history book,” Nor is it a “science book,” or a “philosophy book.” It’s a library of theological treatments of God’s people written over a period of hundreds of years. As such, it contains ancient histories, storytelling, songs, poetry, prophecy, gospels, letters, and apocalypse.

It would be difficult for a group of modern atheists to reproduce such a library, given that they don’t buy into theology, and they’re all from the same time period.

Such multiculturalism is rarely found in literary collections.

 

[SomeRandom]

The closest Philosopher who attempted to write a Bible is Nietzsche with his Thus Spake Zarathustra. Good luck living by it.

But since the Bible was written hundreds of thousands of years ago, no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible. Well, we can be honest and look to Herodotus The Histories or Maybe Thucydides the Pelopenesian War, but really having read them in college neither gets close. Nietzche was the closest in his cynical way.

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible? You may write, "because the Bible is untrue," well wouldn't it make sense, if that is your argument, to turn recorded events into teachable moments? There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

So, discuss. Atheists, where are your great minds that they cannot achieve such a simple goal? (sarcasm and irony noted)

Umm exsqueeze me, but I think you'll find epics like Bhagavad Gita, Journey to the West and the Ramayana frequently pop up in discussions of literature/art/philosophy in many a academic circle. Broaden your reach a little, there's a whole world out there.
Also art and science are two different disciplines. You might as well ask why a mathematician can't produce a classic text and then claim that mathematics is therefore a lesser intellectual form. Different goals will inevitably lead to different results.
Historians study history, what purpose would it suit them to write a historical text? They're not authors.
Why the hell would a scientist waste their time in the arts? They're a scientist, not an artist. (Personal hobbies notwithstanding.)

 

[sojourner]

in reality confirmation bias is a myth.

No. It’s not. Confirmation bias is a thing. And it’s a terrible method for assessing the veracity of ancient texts.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Show not tell, cite them. The Bible is by far the number 1 selling book. I don't see people put their hand over Nietzsche, Herodotus, Thucydides, being sworn in to high offices. Nor do I see any other book put in so many Hotel rooms and Hospitals. If that book existed it would have resonated by now. It hasn't.

You may say I have confirmation bias to psychoanalzy me but in reality confirmation bias is a myth. Please, keep pop psychology to a minimum. Let's discuss.

So, cite them.

Cite what??!

 

[sojourner]

Umm exsqueeze me, but I think you'll find epics like Bhagavad Gita, Journey to the West and the Ramayana frequently pop up in discussions of literature/art/philosophy in many a academic circle. Broaden your reach a little, there's a whole world out there.
Also art and science are two different disciplines. You might as well ask why a mathematician can't produce a classic text and then claim that mathematics is therefore a lesser intellectual form. Different goals will inevitably lead to different results.
Historians study history, what purpose would it suit them to write a historical text? They're not authors.
Why the hell would a scientist waste their time in the arts? They're a scientist, not an artist. (Personal hobbies notwithstanding.)

True. The Bible is very popular in this country only because we’re overwhelmingly Christian here, and our national history is woven with Christian thought.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The closest Philosopher who attempted to write a Bible is Nietzsche with his Thus Spake Zarathustra. Good luck living by it.

But since the Bible was written hundreds of thousands of years ago, no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible. Well, we can be honest and look to Herodotus The Histories or Maybe Thucydides the Pelopenesian War, but really having read them in college neither gets close. Nietzche was the closest in his cynical way.

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible? You may write, "because the Bible is untrue," well wouldn't it make sense, if that is your argument, to turn recorded events into teachable moments? There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

So, discuss. Atheists, where are your great minds that they cannot achieve such a simple goal? (sarcasm and irony noted)

The bible is not special.

The Dharma has been kept in practice and words (over two thousand scriptures) for over 2,000 years. A lot more the bible. Each book related to the other forming a single message by many of his diciples and scholars who wrote for The Buddha and about him alike.

What makes The Dharma special (if you like) is its very straight forward in points. Most lessons are by dialogue to each follower of multuple learning levels and understandings. It doesnt promote "this is a special book" but emphesize practice instead. We get things done faster when we act not believe and have faith. The Buddha was a strong believer in works.

Id say every religious scripture has their unique history. I honestly only heard of christians and historicans focused on christian history try to prove the validity of their beliefs to others. I think other religions just. Dont. Care.

 

[SomeRandom]

True. The Bible is very popular in this country only because we’re overwhelmingly Christian here, and our national history is woven with Christian thought.

Exactly. But go overseas and it's a different literary landscape altogether. There are literally hundreds of retellings of Journey to the West in Japan, for example.
UK's (oh sorry Brit, Scot, Wales etc) literary landscape is a little more interesting than both the US and Aus imo. If only because of the folklore still living alongside the Bible and even borrowing heavily from it whilst not forgetting and even continuously adding in Pagan elements (The Arthurian Legends.) Then you have the various mythologies in Europe. Etc etc etc.
Whilst the Bible does have it's place in the Western Canon, I think it's important to realize that that is itself a safety bubble and other things exist as well.

 

[Justme1981]

First of all, the Bible isn’t a “history book,” Nor is it a “science book,” or a “philosophy book.” It’s a library of theological treatments of God’s people written over a period of hundreds of years. As such, it contains ancient histories, storytelling, songs, poetry, prophecy, gospels, letters, and apocalypse.

It would be difficult for a group of modern atheists to reproduce such a library, given that they don’t buy into theology, and they’re all from the same time period.

Such multiculturalism is rarely found in literary collections.

Well, good point. But scientists, atheists, Historians have a history of books since the Bible they could piece together like an anthology that could show some truth like the Bible.

You may say the Bible is just a collection of books, but there is a linear story going on. After the Torah, follow Joshua, which leads to Judges, which lead to Samuel...etc...sure at some points the order breaks but there is a linear narrative being told. If you want me to explain it just ask.

 

[Justme1981]

Umm exsqueeze me, but I think you'll find epics like Bhagavad Gita, Journey to the West and the Ramayana frequently pop up in discussions of literature/art/philosophy in many a academic circle. Broaden your reaca little, there's a whole world out there.
Also art and science are two different disciplines. You might as well ask why a mathematician can't produce a classic text and then claim that mathematics is therefore a lesser intellectual form. Different goals will inevitably lead to different results.
Historians study history, what purpose would it suit them to write a historical text? They're not authors.
Why the hell would a scientist waste their time in the arts? They're a scientist, not an artist. (Personal hobbies notwithstanding.)

Mathematicians have come up with notable classic texts by the way. Look at Flatlands, Alice in Wonderland, Descarte, Spinoza, Pascale, Leibnitz and others. There was a time when to be a Mathematician meant to do much more than math. Also, when you get to pure a lot of it is writing.

As for the Gita, I have read it and it is a sacred text much like the Upanishads. The Mahayana Sutras are sacred texts as well. But does it rise to the level of Bible though? I'm not so certain that is debatable.

 

[Justme1981]

The bible is not special.

The Dharma has been kept in practice and words (over two thousand scriptures) for over 2,000 years. A lot more the bible. Each book related to the other forming a single message by many of his diciples and scholars who wrote for the bible and about him alike.

What makes The Dharma special (if you like) is its very straight forward in points. Most lessons are by dialogue to each follower of multuple learning levels and understandings. It doesnt promote "this is a special book" but emphesize practice instead. We get things done faster when we act not believe and have faith. The Buddha was a strong believer in works.

Id say every religious scripture has their unique history. I honestly only heard of christians and historicans focused on christian history try to prove the validity of their beliefs to others. I think other religions just. Dont. Care.

I agree I have studied ancient Mahayana and in Mahayana the Dharma is the place of waiting and becoming all that were are waiting to be.

If you have such secret knowledge share it. Don't keep it hidden. If you look at my post history in the music section I share as much as I know of that Ancient religion Satanism.

I met a Buddha once who came to my birthday. He said, "there are many monks but no Buddha's on Earth."

And again, these are not Atheists, Historians or Scientists so any dichotomy you place is lack of insight. I speak only of those who say these spiritual books are simple. Well create one yourself atheists, Historians and Scientists.

Cheers!

(I'm a Catholic from California. Life is good.)

 

[Justme1981]

Cite what??!

That's the best you can do? Frustration leads to know great knowledge other than jealousy, which you will become.

 

[Milton Platt]

The closest Philosopher who attempted to write a Bible is Nietzsche with his Thus Spake Zarathustra. Good luck living by it.

But since the Bible was written hundreds of thousands of years ago, no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible. Well, we can be honest and look to Herodotus The Histories or Maybe Thucydides the Pelopenesian War, but really having read them in college neither gets close. Nietzche was the closest in his cynical way.

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible? You may write, "because the Bible is untrue," well wouldn't it make sense, if that is your argument, to turn recorded events into teachable moments? There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

So, discuss. Atheists, where are your great minds that they cannot achieve such a simple goal? (sarcasm and irony noted)

The Bible is not a history book. It is a collection of myths and unsubstantiated stories with unknown authors that was passed around orally for decades, sometimes centuries, before being written down, copied numerous times, translated numerous times, and finally a select few of the stories were collected together under one cover while ignoring those that were not to the liking of the people doing the compilation.

There are many history books in the library and online, that are more detailed and more accurate.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I agree I have studied ancient Mahayana and in Mahayana the Dharma is the place of waiting and becoming all that were are waiting to be.

If you have such secret knowledge share it. Don't keep it hidden. If you look at my post history in the music section I share as much as I know of that Ancient religion Satanism.

I met a Buddha once who came to my birthday. He said, "there are many monks but no Buddha's on Earth."

And again, these are not Atheists, Historians or Scientists so any dichotomy you place is lack of insight. I speak only of those who say these spiritual books are simple. Well create one yourself atheists, Historians and Scientists.

Cheers!

(I'm a Catholic from California. Life is good.)

Um. Dont know what to say. Doesnt add up. Catholic and Buddhism? Hm.

 

[Justme1981]

The Bible is not a history book. It is a collection of myths and unsubstantiated stories with unknown authors that was passed around orally for decades, sometimes centuries, before being written down, copied numerous times, translated numerous times, and finally a select few were collected together under one cover while ignoring those that were not to the liking of the ones doing the compilation.

There are many history books in the library and online, that are more detailed and more accurate.

But are they as insightful? Why does the Bible resonate and still resonate? You give the stock answer, you call it a myth I call it the truth. I call your histories Myth. Why? What record is it to substantiate? You mine as well get into Ancient Aliens if you want to get into Archaeology. Essentially they can't figure anything out because the assumption is always primitiveness. Well, if those ancient men were so primitive why is no one like them now? I mean who are our Leibnitz's and Ezekiels?

I can't find them anywhere myself. One day you will understand just because you came later in history doesn't mean you are automatically better than people before why you. Like Newton said, "If I have seen so far it's because I stood on the shoulders of giants." Well, where are our Giants? Is Elon Musk it? How about Jeff Bezos? I see nothing that makes your or most people as great as Socrates.

 

[Justme1981]

Um. Dont know what to say. Doesnt add up. Catholic and Buddhism? Hm.

I am Catholic. I study all the religions because I am Liberal and I know they all have truth. Now this is cognitive dissonance. Look at the reaction. He'll get over it.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The closest Philosopher who attempted to write a Bible is Nietzsche with his Thus Spake Zarathustra. Good luck living by it.

But since the Bible was written hundreds of thousands of years ago, no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible. Well, we can be honest and look to Herodotus The Histories or Maybe Thucydides the Pelopenesian War, but really having read them in college neither gets close. Nietzche was the closest in his cynical way.

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible? You may write, "because the Bible is untrue," well wouldn't it make sense, if that is your argument, to turn recorded events into teachable moments? There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

So, discuss. Atheists, where are your great minds that they cannot achieve such a simple goal? (sarcasm and irony noted)

I doubt the Bible's hundreds of thousands of years old. I'm thinking more like 2000 years at best.