Have you read the Bible?

[shandyjan]

Was catholic and went to church. I read a huge chunk of the bible in my 20s, and a huge chunk in the last few years, but can't say Ive read it all. I read bits and pieces as they come up now, especially when our good writers here take us through some things.
I know Ive read more of the bible as an atheist than my Christian family and friends put together.

 

[Delvo]

I've actually started to read straight through it twice with the goal of finishing the entirety, but bogged down in Genesis not long after the Flood both times. Maybe I should just pick a different starting point a few books later, when it starts getting quasi-historical, which is the part that interested me in the first place...

 

[Frozenwolf150]

In addition to reading the Bible, I would also strongly recommend to anyone who is interested taking a course on scriptural studies and comparative religion. In my Hebrew Bible course, there were students from all religious backgrounds, believers and non-believers alike. For one of the assigned essays where we were asked to explain our own views on religion and God, I wrote about my atheism and secular beliefs. I was not judged or excluded. Every point of view had a chance to speak.

 

[ctamblyn]

In addition to reading the Bible, I would also strongly recommend to anyone who is interested taking a course on scriptural studies and comparative religion. In my Hebrew Bible course, there were students from all religious backgrounds, believers and non-believers alike. For one of the assigned essays where we were asked to explain our own views on religion and God, I wrote about my atheism and secular beliefs. I was not judged or excluded. Every point of view had a chance to speak.

Yale have some online lectures, too, for those who'd just like to get a taste:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo-YL-lv3RY&list=PLh9mgdi4rNeyuvTEbD-Ei0JdMUujXfyWi

 

[arthwollipot]

I've actually started to read straight through it twice with the goal of finishing the entirety, but bogged down in Genesis not long after the Flood both times. Maybe I should just pick a different starting point a few books later, when it starts getting quasi-historical, which is the part that interested me in the first place...

Start with Joshua. That's my favourite book. So much blood.

 

[asydhouse]

My family never mentioned religion when I was a child (my one encounter was a kid down the street telling me God was a guy with a big white beard and he lived in the clouds… even at 6 or 7, that struck me as unlikely!). Maybe there was some stuff in school in Canada, but it went over my head… ah, I do remember we were told about the tower of babel, and I thought it was strange that god wanted to disrupt communications between people… I remember now that it put god into the role of an untrustworthy character that I was suspicious of.

Anyway, we moved to Vermont and we had no neighbours within 2 miles down the blacktop highway, so I spent that summer "alone" (only child), and seeing the bible in the house, I started to read it that summer (10 years old). I think I managed about two pages before getting fed up with the crapness of it's composition: when my Mom asked me what I thought, I said "There's too many ands." She found that amusing, and it was never mentioned again… until about 5 years later my Dad read Paramahansa Yogananda's autobiography, started doing the meditation, convinced himself he was "astral travelling", and decided he needed to become a xtian… must have freaked himself out!

Being naive and fascinated by supernatural stuff and reincarnation (Ripley's Believe it or Not was swallowed as factual truth in our house…aaargh!), I went along with them when they joined the Mormons. I don't regret anything else I've ever done, but that was a big mistake. It took me three years to leave again, but I was out by the time I was 18. By another measure though, the consequences of that stupidity have taken years to shake off.

I'm just glad I wasn't born Catholic! (Or muslim of jewish or hindu or sikh or… you get the picture!

PS forgot to say, I did read the New Testament during that time, but looking back at how I enjoyed the Book of Revelations, I was reading it with a naive and foolish mind. The Book of Mormon was just unreadable. Years later i tried again, and was astonished at the violence, and the relishing of the violence! It is straight up pornography for wannabe zealots. War porn. Disgusting!

 

[researcherTony]

Testing 1,2,3

Earth calling JREF Forums are you there.
Oh no, a mass extinction event has occurred.

What do you mean someone eat it?

 

[Frozenwolf150]

My favorite book is probably Ecclesiastes. It has the most positive passages, according to the Skeptic's Annotated Bible.

My least favorite is Revelation. Of all the books of the Bible, this one gets abused and misinterpreted the most, to the point where certain fundamentalist Christian sects have pretty much become doomsday cults. Apparently, the word "metaphor" doesn't mean anything to these people. Nor does it occur to them that the events in Revelation should have already happened a long time ago. The thing is, if you sincerely believe the world is going to end soon, it creates no incentive to build a sustainable civilization for future generations.

 

[arthwollipot]

My least favorite is Revelation. Of all the books of the Bible, this one gets abused and misinterpreted the most, to the point where certain fundamentalist Christian sects have pretty much become doomsday cults. Apparently, the word "metaphor" doesn't mean anything to these people. Nor does it occur to them that the events in Revelation should have already happened a long time ago. The thing is, if you sincerely believe the world is going to end soon, it creates no incentive to build a sustainable civilization for future generations.

Oh, but Revelation is awesome! And you haven't read it until you've read it rendered in Lego.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Haven't read the book, but I did see the movie(s). I think Jeffrey Hunter was the best Jesus. He was the only one good enough to go on to be Captain of the Enterprise.

Robert Powell... As Jasper Carrott put it "He started out as the Son of God but we soon brought him down to our level!

 

[Manopolus]

I read The Bible regularly (not daily, but now and then)... and have not considered myself a Christian since I was about 12 when I read the whole thing in one go. I find it interesting for some reason, but there isn't a chance in hell of me ever considering myself a Christian at this point. There's some interesting things in there, but the core of the religion is completely rotten.

Ultimately, I would consider a being that thought that eternal torture was an appropriate punishment for ANYTHING to be less than human, rather than more. Even the worst among us would not likely do that sort of thing, particularly if we had to do it up close and personal. That's what I mean by the core being rotten -- along with the supposed selection process.

 

[Leumas]

I read The Bible regularly (not daily, but now and then)... and have not considered myself a Christian since I was about 12 when I read the whole thing in one go. I find it interesting for some reason, but there isn't a chance in hell of me ever considering myself a Christian at this point. There's some interesting things in there, but the core of the religion is completely rotten.
Ultimately, I would consider a being that thought that eternal torture was an appropriate punishment for ANYTHING to be less than human, rather than more. Even the worst among us would not likely do that sort of thing, particularly if we had to do it up close and personal. That's what I mean by the core being rotten

The core of the Christian religion, regardless of what sect or faction or denomination or cult you consider which spawned from it, is that no matter how much of a sinner one is he will be saved if he repents his sins and believed in and loved Jesus as the son of god who died for humans' sake as a scapegoat and bloody human sacrificial sin offering of god to himself as himself to appease himself.

In fact many churches boast of how many "fallen" they have managed to gather in their flock all based on the utterly retarded parable of the lost sheep in Matthew 18:12–14 and the most unjust story of the prodigal son in Luke 15:11-32 and the moronic parable of the workers in the vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16.

So this means that one could be the most heinous fiend and most vile monster and most heartless psychopath with numerous victims and still go to heaven for eternity if only he truly repented.

But more important than just repenting one also needs to truly love Jesus as the human blood sacrifice of no less than God himself pretending to be his own son after having oozed out of the vagina of an already married 13 years old virgin girl descendant of a Babylonian cowardly pimp via the family line of an adulterating murdering brigand king who is a descendant of two Bedouin tribes one of which stems from the nephew of the Babylonian wife-pimping coward after said nephew having impregnated his own daughter subsequent to her raping him while the other family line stems from a great-grandson of the Babylonian cowardly pimp as a result of said great-grandson impregnating his daughter-in-law as a consequence of hiring her as a street prostitute.

Moreover - and therein lies further rottenness beyond belief - the victims of the repentant saved monster will spend eternity in hell if they as a result of the dastard's misdeeds happen to lose faith in Jesus. Read this post of mine about how heinously unjust the concept of Christian Salvation is.

-- along with the supposed selection process.

In regards to the supposed selection process, we have here yet another manifestation of the rotten to the core philosophy.

Paul stated outright (Romans 9:11-23) that there is no free will and that God creates people destined to suffer for eternity.

So never mind all that believing or not believing in the first place since in fact God has already created some of us destined to burn forever in hell while others regardless of their vileness destined to Eternal Heavenly Servitude.

This also makes one wonder, why then bother with all that rape and adultery and slithering out of the insides of a 13 years descendant of a Babylonian wife-pimping coward altogether?

Hebrews 9:11-23

9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )
9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,​

 

[Manopolus]

The core of the Christian religion...

Well yeah, but I was trying to be brief and point out the simplest and most obvious of the religion's many flaws.

"We see through the glass darkly" doesn't hardly excuse a rotten ethos, although it can be used to explain away perceived ridiculousness up to a point. Ultimately I have no problem with people believing in fairy tales. I do, however, have a problem with a religion whose primary doctrine tarnishes the ethical makeup of anyone that believes it.

 

[Leumas]

My least favorite is Revelation. Of all the books of the Bible, this one gets abused and misinterpreted the most, to the point where certain fundamentalist Christian sects have pretty much become doomsday cults. Apparently, the word "metaphor" doesn't mean anything to these people. Nor does it occur to them that the events in Revelation should have already happened a long time ago. The thing is, if you sincerely believe the world is going to end soon, it creates no incentive to build a sustainable civilization for future generations.

What pray tell is Revelation a metaphor for? What are those historical events that have already happened that have been metaphorically alluded to in Revelation?

Last time I looked at history I found no mention of any Christ coming down on a cloud with a cacophony of trumpets and nary a historical reference to 144,000 Jewish virgin males disappearing in a wink... unless the holocaust is it... but then that was a lot more than 144,000 and they were not just all virgin men only... also I am pretty sure Hitler was no Christ.... but who knows!

Just to be sure, I googled any historical mention of the four horsemen actually having come to earth as mentioned in Revelation and all I could find was a reference to Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hutchens, Daniel Dennett and Samuel Harris ... so was Revelation metaphorically referencing four "fundamentalist atheists" wreaking mayhem on earth?

I am sure I might be wrong, but sorry I do not see in any history I have read that the events described in Revelation "have already happened a long time ago" or ever … Metaphorically or otherwise.

I am 1000% sure that the third part of the sun was never ever smitten, nor was the third part of the moon, along with the third part of the stars ... so what historical event was this tidbit a metaphor for and how?

I am totally sure that there are no astronomical reports of the third part of all cosmic bodies disappearing because they were darkened, nor any day not shining for a third part of it, and the night likewise (whatever that might mean) ... so what historical event was this tidbit a metaphor for and how?

There is no historical mention of reliable and verifiable eyewitnesses having reported hearing or seeing an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth!

No reputed astronomers have ever reported a great star called Wormwood or otherwise, burning as it were a lamp, which fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters which caused the death of multitudes due to the waters becoming bitter.

Last time I looked no dragon has ever swiped the stars out of the heavens with a swoop of his tail bringing them tumbling down to earth.

I am sure no dragon or devil has ever been imprisoned in the bowels of earth for a 1000 years.

According to you, Revelation is a metaphor for events that should have already happened a long time ago.

Can you then elaborate what historical events are those and how the descriptions in Revelation are a metaphor for said events? You do not have to take every single bit of Revelation… just the ones I mention above would be a good start.

Anyone who knows how to read words that are actually written down on a page and has read those in the pages of the book of Revelation would surmise that its main thrust is

Jesus will be imminently returning to wreak havoc on earth as punishment for the sinners and will be rewarding the righteous by whisking them away to heaven to begin an eternal session of singing hymnals in his worship while he sits on the right hand side of his father on bejeweled thrones.​

Since Jesus has yet to come and since sinners and sin still abound while the meek are still being trodden into the earth rather than inheriting it, then any person who believes in Jesus must rationally conclude that the main thrust of Revelation is yet to be fulfilled.

Now, literalists might expect that every gruesome detail will in fact take place as described, while more liberal interpreters might dismiss all the fairy tale aspects and just take it as a metaphor for Jesus’ second coming to reward and punish in the final act of the hideous pathetic reality show.

More rational thinkers would dismiss the whole thing as fairy tales and myth making and wishful thinking.

I wonder what kind of epistemology would enable a person who does not believe in gods nor in Jesus as a god to assert that Revelation is a metaphor for events that have actually already occurred long ago in history?

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Leumas,

I think you totally misread what Frozenwolf150 posted.

I read it as condemnation of failed prophecy, not that prophesied events had in fact happened "a long time ago".

Or am I the one misreading it?

 

[Brainache]

What pray tell is Revelation a metaphor for? What are those historical events that have already happened that have been metaphorically alluded to in Revelation?

Last time I looked at history I found no mention of any Christ coming down on a cloud with a cacophony of trumpets and nary a historical reference to 144,000 Jewish virgin males disappearing in a wink... unless the holocaust is it... but then that was a lot more than 144,000 and they were not just all virgin men only... also I am pretty sure Hitler was no Christ.... but who knows!

Just to be sure, I googled any historical mention of the four horsemen actually having come to earth as mentioned in Revelation and all I could find was a reference to Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hutchens, Daniel Dennett and Samuel Harris ... so was Revelation metaphorically referencing four "fundamentalist atheists" wreaking mayhem on earth?

I am sure I might be wrong, but sorry I do not see in any history I have read that the events described in Revelation"have already happened a long time ago" or ever … Metaphorically or otherwise.

I am 1000% sure that the third part of the sun was never ever smitten, nor was the third part of the moon, along with the third part of the stars ... so what historical event was this tidbit a metaphor for and how?

I am totally sure that there are no astronomical reports of the third part of all cosmic bodies disappearing because they were darkened, nor any day not shining for a third part of it, and the night likewise (whatever that might mean) ... so what historical event was this tidbit a metaphor for and how?

There is no historical mention of reliable and verifiable eyewitnesses having reported hearing or seeing an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth!

No reputed astronomers have ever reported a great star called Wormwood or otherwise, burning as it were a lamp, which fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters which caused the death of multitudes due to the waters becoming bitter.

Last time I looked no dragon has ever swiped the stars out of the heavens with a swoop of his tail bringing them tumbling down to earth.

I am sure no dragon or devil has ever been imprisoned in the bowels of earth for a 1000 years.

According to you, Revelation is a metaphor for events that should have already happened a long time ago.

Can you then elaborate what historical events are those and how the descriptions in Revelation are a metaphor for said events? You do not have to take every single bit of Revelation… just the ones I mention above would be a good start.

Anyone who knows how to read words that are actually written down on a page and has read those in the pages of the book of Revelation would surmise that its main thrust is

Jesus will be imminently returning to wreak havoc on earth as punishment for the sinners and will be rewarding the righteous by whisking them away to heaven to begin an eternal session of singing hymnals in his worship while he sits on the right hand side of his father on bejeweled thrones.​

Since Jesus has yet to come and since sinners and sin still abound while the meek are still being trodden into the earth rather than inheriting it, then any person who believes in Jesus must rationally conclude that the main thrust of Revelation is yet to be fulfilled.

Now, literalists might expect that every gruesome detail will in fact take place as described, while more liberal interpreters might dismiss all the fairy tale aspects and just take it as a metaphor for Jesus’ second coming to reward and punish in the final act of the gruesome pathetic reality show.

More rational thinkers would dismiss the whole thing as fairy tales and myth making and wishful thinking.

I wonder what kind of epistemology would enable a person who does not believe in gods nor in Jesus as a god to assert that Revelation is a metaphor for events that have actually already occurred long ago in history?

Umm... "Revelation is a metaphor for events that should have already happened a long time ago" (my bold).

I'm pretty sure Frozen Wolf was pointing out that these events in Revelation were supposed to happen, but didn't. The intro to Rev. says something about events that will "soon come to pass", so given that these things haven't happened, it's pretty safe to assume 2000 years later that they aren't going to.

 

[Leumas]

Umm... "Revelation is a misinterpreted metaphor for events that should have already happened a long time ago" (my bold).

I'm pretty sure Frozen Wolf was pointing out that these events in Revelation were supposed to happen, but didn't. The intro to Rev. says something about events that will "soon come to pass", so given that these things haven't happened, it's pretty safe to assume 2000 years later that they aren't going to.

I see... that makes more sense.... but still.... calling it a misinterpreted metaphor is puzzling.

Why claim it is a metaphor for stuff that did not happen... Why say that something is a metaphor for delusions.... why not just say it is delusions?

What were these delusions supposed to be a metaphor for? What is the correct interpretation... calling it a misinterpreted metaphor implies that there is a correct way to interpret the metaphor.

And if one believes in Jesus couldn't he still be right (within a belief rationality) in thinking that maybe Jesus is just running late and he will still do what is described, at least the reward and punishment bit?

Whether a fundamentalist or liberal believer in Jesus wouldn't he be rationally (within the confines of believing) justified in thinking that Jesus will eventually come back and reward and punish regardless of the details?

 

[Leumas]

Leumas,

I think you totally misread what Frozenwolf150 posted.

I read it as condemnation of failed prophecy, not that prophesied events had in fact happened "a long time ago".

Or am I the one misreading it?

Let's have a look at this part....

My least favorite is Revelation. Of all the books of the Bible, this one gets abused and misinterpreted the most, to the point where certain fundamentalist Christian sects have pretty much become doomsday cults. Apparently, the word "metaphor" doesn't mean anything to these people. Nor does it occur to them that the events in Revelation should have already happened a long time ago. The thing is, if you sincerely believe the world is going to end soon, it creates no incentive to build a sustainable civilization for future generations.

What does misinterpretation have to do with reading a failed prophecy? Either it is an outright failed prophecy or there is still some possibility of it not having failed if one only knew how to interpret it.

Also it is either an outright failed prophecy or it still has some validity if the metaphor of it is fathomed correctly.

Besides, if one believes in Jesus, whether fundamentalist or otherwise, and one believes Jesus is going to come back then Revelation is a book of prophecy that is yet to be fulfilled regardless of the details. A fundamentalist might believe word for word in Revelation and a liberal might believe in the overall coming back to reward and punish and dismiss the rest as misinterpreted metaphors.

I think a believer in Jesus would justifiably (within the rational of believing that is) argue that it is not a failed prophecy but rather a prophecy that is yet to be fulfilled and if it is a misinterpreted metaphor or otherwise is just details…. What matters is that it says Jesus is coming back and will be rewarding the believers and punishing the rest… the details of the punishment might be fanciful as far as a liberal believer is concerned but still… both fundamentalists and liberal believers in Jesus agree that Jesus is coming back.

Who are we “nasty atheists” to judge it as a failed prophecy? Who are we to presume that we can impose on Jesus a strict schedule for his coming back? He will jolly well come back whenever he needs to come back according to the divine plan?

... to the point where certain fundamentalist Christian sects have pretty much become doomsday cults.

Any Christian who believes in Jesus' return to punish the sinners and reward the righteous, whether fundamentalist or otherwise, is thus a believer in doomsday by definition.... not just certain fundamentalists.... unless if course the definition of fundamentalism is stretched to encompass people who believe Jesus is coming back.

 

[Brainache]

I see... that makes more sense.... but still.... calling it a metaphor is puzzling.

Why claim it is a metaphor for stuff that did not happen... Why say that something is a metaphor for delusions.... why not just say it is delusions?

What were these delusions supposed to be a metaphor for?

And if one believes in Jesus couldn't he still be right in thinking that maybe Jesus is just running late and he will still do what is described, at least the reward and punishment bit?

Whether fundamentalist or liberal believer in Jesus wouldn't he be rationally (within the confines of believing) justified in thinking that Jesus will eventually come back and reward and punish regardless of the details?

Who knows what was going through the Author's head? I suspect hallucinogens of some sort...

Here's a little video about the book:

 

[Leumas]

Who knows what was going through the Author's head? I suspect hallucinogens of some sort...

Here's a little video about the book:

Certainly... but one can hardly refer to drug induced delusions as "misinterpreted metaphors".

What are they metaphors for and how can one rightly interpret delusions and decipher the metaphors of a psychedelic stupor? Other than as a psychiatrist treating a patient that is.