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

[Bob the Unbeliever]

How are the reviewers chosen? Who chooses the Peers? Doesn't seem to work out well for a jury where there is great effort in reviewing people. Who is this elite group of people who by some authority get to decide what is rightt or wrong. Sound like a scam to me. Have you met these people? Do they have wives and families and do they live normal lives? Or do they all have long beards and long hair? Or do they all wear glasses and are socially awkward? Sounds like a low standard to be a peer reviewer.

Cheers!

Here, you demonstrate you do not actually understand how real research, and specifically, the scientific method works.

If you did understand? You'd not have posted such a lame attempt to belittle the phrase "peer review".

There exists an actual mechanism, wherin you can go ask for facts in the matter-- and (to someone unfamiliar with computers-- I can only assume that would be you) like "magic" the answers appear on their computer screen!

Amazing! Stupendous! Pretty much the entire sum of Human Knowledge-- with caveats-- available at your fingertips!

You can ask it anything! "Who chooses peer review" and *woosh* Multiple answers appear!

Warning: Using scientific resources like this can damage your pre-conceived ideas about faith...

 

[74x12]

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 think it's a good point because other works do not come close.

 

[columbus]

Why does the Bible resonate and still resonate?

Because It's so vague, old, incoherent and self-contradictory that It will support most anything that you want to believe.
Tom

 

[nPeace]

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.

Good point... worth noting. From Genesis to Revelation there is one harmonious thread running right through.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Good point... worth noting. From Genesis to Revelation there is one harmonious thread running right through.

Not really. It can be reinterpreted so that it may look that way, but those that wrote the first part would almost certainly not agree with the second part.

 

[Father Heathen]

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)

Countless books have been written in modern times that far surpass the bible in terms of accuracy, logic, ethics, morality, depth, substance, etc. But that aside, rational people use their brains rather than blindly follow some silly book, hence there's no need to "create a new bible". Even the ancient holy books of other religions (such as The Bhagavad Gita, The Adi Granth, The Kitáb-i-Aqdas, etc.) arguably put the Bible to shame. The bible is simply not that impressive. Sorry.

Skeptic's Annotated Bible / Quran / Book of Morman>

 

[Father Heathen]

But are they as insightful?

They are far more detailed and accurate, so yes.

Why does the Bible resonate and still resonate?

Does it, though? Maybe with those who were indoctrinated as children to think so.

You give the stock answer, you call it a myth I call it the truth. I call your histories Myth.

Unfortunately, your willful ignorance doesn't magically make records, evidence, data, etc. disappear.

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.

Don't worry, we still have superstitious goat herders in many parts of the third world.

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.

The reason we don't deify people like that anymore is because we've grown to see it as the foolishness that it is. It's not that people now aren't as great as people in the past, but that we now recognize no human truly deserves to be placed upon such a lofty pedestal.

 

[Father Heathen]

Have you read the Bible or is this the stock internet answer?

Most here have indeed read the bible, which is precisely why they consider it underwhelming.

 

[Milton Platt]

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.

Quite a rant.
I have no idea how you equate "ancient aliens" with the field of archaeology or what you are even meaning.
I'm not sure of your meaning of "primitive". Less knowledgeable? Yes. More superstitious? Yes. Generally uneducated? Yes. Prone to magical thinking? Yes.

There is no valid reason why historians should want to write a book of unsubstantiated claims containing myths and superstition.

 

[shunyadragon]

The Bible is indeed primitive, and based to large extent on mythology, and many things have been written since that have added to the volumes of human knowledge. Yes, the Bible contains Revelation and spiritual teachings, but it is woefully incomplete.

 

[Dawnofhope]

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)

By any objective standard its the most read book in known history. It’s remained as relevant now as when it’s first stories were passed down through oral tradition. I can not think of any work that has influenced history and civilisation to the same extent over the last one thousand years.

The Quran, Vedic texts, and Early Buddhist writings are the best examples for comparison in regards longevity and influence on history.

 

[Windwalker]

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.

This should be printed in gold, it's so concise and full of great insight.

 

[SomeRandom]

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.

Of course, there are brilliant minds who excel above all others and run the gamut in many disciplines. Exemplary minds are not the norm, even in academia, insofar as "multitasking" is concerned anyway. Besides science has largely drifted away from philosophy making the overlap dwindle slightly, it could be argued. And there are many tomes on ethics, philosophy and indeed morality if you so desire. There are even collections of various writers on such topics, complete with academic essays dissecting them all. So you can create a Bible of sorts using various scientists, philosophers and forward thinkers, if one has the desire to do so. Will it contain the literary devices of the Bible? Depends on how literary the writers are in the first place.
I'm still not sure why you want scientists to act like artists, though.

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.

Well there is no accounting for taste, I suppose.

Also just had to say this, but popularity does not automatically equal great. Otherwise McDonalds would be considered fine dining. Hitting the "sweet spot" for the general proletariat is not really a mark of intellectual greatness. Mere popularity, deserved or not, is a rather a shallow marker in any case.

 

[Cacotopia]

I would be interested to know how many people outside of religious organizations actually bought bibles.

It is likely that it is the number one most sold book in relation to churches and various other religious institutions purchasing/ordering 100's of millions of copies and handing them out like hotcakes, or hotels where the owners of such corporate entities are christian and fill their establishments with bibles.

If those figures were removed where would the bible stand then on the historical list of most books sold?

 

[Cacotopia]

Why would atheists want a single book to follow when we have libraries full of them.

Also why would I want to stop with up to today knowledge? More to learn, more to understand, I wouldn't want there to be some text out there that had information to base my life's interactions on for up to 6/16/18 12:18PM.

In 600 years it may be viewed as a book full of draconian practices like the bible is today.

 

[Etritonakin]

Not only does the bible contain some extremely "futuristic" concepts -U.F.O.s/flying craft piloted by thought/intent (Daniel) Matrix/Forbidden Planet -style learning (first mention of spirit of God after Genesis) -separating and storage of mind/spirit, transference of mind/spirit to more powerful and invulnerable body, etc...... it also contains an overall plan (actually known by few -even of those who claim to believe in the bible) to answer all of man's problems, which recognizes and addresses all of the core issues.
Add to that a perfectly accurate and rather detailed overview of world events yet future -which continue to happen as written -and the bible is definitely unique.

As an example, the following describes the recent, present and future situations in/around Jerusalem -which precede Israel being attacked by its neighbors, followed by major world powers with various intentions as described elsewhere...

2Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. 3And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it. 4In that day, saith the LORD, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness. 5And the governors of Judah shall say in their heart, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the LORD of hosts their God.

6In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem. 7The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first.......

 

[Altfish]

The reason atheists don't have a 'Bible' is that they do not live by dogma. Ideas change and evolve.
If atheists had a book it would be revised at least annually as knowledge develops and humanity evolves.
I don't understand why a book that is 2000 years old without amendment is so revered. There are many errors, untruths, unethical statements in the Bible; wouldn't it benefit from a complete revision?

 

[Estro Felino]

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)

With all due respect, the Peloponnesian War is a masterpiece of historiography and considered real journalism of the Ancient Age, because it narrates facts minute by minute in incredible detail...

The Bible has too much mythology in it...so its historical truthfulness decreases a bit

 

[blü 2]

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

What exactly is a 'bible' such that Nietzsche, in your view, wrote, or all but wrote, one?

no one ancient or modern has ever been able to duplicate the interaction of History, Art, Literature, Religion and Spirituality like the Bible.

I'd mark the bible: History: F / Art-Literature A+ ─ D- (but I don't speak Hebrew and my koine Greek is amateur, so I'm relying on the opinion of others) / Religion (no criteria so no evaluation possible).

So, why can't Atheists, Scientists and Historians write a History Book like the Bible?

Who says they can't?

The problem is, they have no reason to do so. The atheist bible reads:

[ ] I don't think God / gods exist.
[ ] I don't think God / gods exist (or the supernatural either).
[ ] I think God / gods don't exist.
[ ] I think God / gods don't exist (nor the supernatural either)​

TICK ONE.

Scientists (as such) write science. The bible gets a pass for science, since it reasonably reflects the science of the 1st millennium BCE - 1st century CE, but only a B- since it shows no depth of understanding.

Historians (as such) write history. The bible gets an F for history (tales not being history).

There is nothing a Historian ever written that is as universal and insightful as the Bible.

There is nothing in the bible as universal and insightful, not to mention artistic, as FitzGerald's The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, if you want an argument ─ arguably the greatest wisdom poem in English. And it tends not to contradict itself, having the great advantage of only one author, only one politics and only one worldview.

(Before you answer, please read it, or reread it. >Here's a link< to the '5th edition'. In fact it's the 4th edition with a handful of draft amendments FitzGerald left on a manuscript but never authorized, only about half of them being improvements.)

 

[ChristineM]

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)

Scientists etc write papers about science, which are based on the natural world and are peer reviewed.

Why would you want an author of knowledge to write a bronze age mythology book?

If you want a fiction or mythology book try J K Rowlings Harry Potter series or Homers Odyssey.

It is interesting that you utilise the fruits of science from software engineering to quantum mechanics to diss science. Do you not see the duplicity in that?

Btw,the Bible was not written hundreds of thousands of years ago, the OT is selectively cloned from Jewish Scripture which was written in the late bronze age between 2500 and 2200 years ago. The NT was compiled from various sources, old wives tales and hear say about 1650 years ago and repeatedly changed and edited since.