Is the Bible worth reading II: Electric Jewgaloo

[Insomniac]

Some fellow (http://forum.gorillamask.net/www.slate.com/id/2212616/)wrote a bit about the bible after reading it whole through a couple of years ago. His conclusions, as an ethnic Jew, are similar to, but distinct from, Lemuel Washburn (http://forum.gorillamask.net/showthread.php?t=12770).

I began the Bible as a hopeful, but indifferent, agnostic. I wished for a God, but I didn't really care. I leave the Bible as a hopeless and angry agnostic. I'm brokenhearted about God.

After reading about the genocides, the plagues, the murders, the mass enslavements, the ruthless vengeance for minor sins (or none at all), and all that smiting—every bit of it directly performed, authorized, or approved by God—I can only conclude that the God of the Hebrew Bible, if He existed, was awful, cruel, and capricious. He gives us moments of beauty—such sublime beauty and grace!—but taken as a whole, He is no God I want to obey and no God I can love.

Is the bible worth reading? The good man says yes, and even encourages it be studied in high schools like Shakespeare, Dickens, and Twain. But if we let them really read long passages, would it do more to turn them off of religion than any other single thing?

[wonderllama]

I think for most, the Bible should probably be read like a Dictionary.
You look up the bit you are currently interested in, then return it to the shelf.

If you sit back and read it from cover to cover, you'll probably be depressed and left wanting...much like reading the Dictionary!

[Bungle]

Only the book of Leviticus.

I guess it suppose it depends on the context for which one is reading the bible. I'm not convinced anyone could even study the bible objectively at this point, it just always seems to turn into an argument fueled by emotion.

[Archetype]

Only the book of Leviticus.

I guess it suppose it depends on the context for which one is reading the bible. I'm not convinced anyone could even study the bible objectively at this point, it just always seems to turn into an argument fueled by emotion.
Objectivity is a crock.

[Phil Theehor]

Jesus has prepared a short rebuttal to Mr. Washburn

http://i730.photobucket.com/albums/ww307/philtheehor/1christ-middle-finger.jpg

[Morfin]

Well, to be fair, Washburn is right when he says,

It does not give instruction in any of the sciences. It furnishes no help to labor. It is useless as a political guide. There is nothing in it that gives the mechanic any hint, or affords the farmer any enlightenment in his occupation.

I quite agree. The other day, I was fixing a leaky faucet, and, I'll tell ya, I looked through my Bible for a couple hours and couldn't find anywhere how to stop that durn leak.

Putting that aside, his opinion is totally wrong. If you throw out everything but leave in the 10 Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, and the Golden Rule, you have something very important and a good set of rules to live by.

And even putting that aside, as I posted in the original thread, the Bible deserves to be read, at least in part, merely because several billion people consider it to be of tremendous value. That, in and of itself makes it important to read.

[ricko]

Get the Cliff Notes

[Archangel]

It does not give instruction in any of the sciences. It furnishes no help to labor. It is useless as a political guide. There is nothing in it that gives the mechanic any hint, or affords the farmer any enlightenment in his occupation.

Yeah, I fail to see the practical use of the Decameron, Elective Affinities, or Paradise Lost, as well... Let's reduce the output of human thought to mother fucking instruction manuals.

Guys like that are partly why I am a Catholic. If mouth-breathers like him think that by heaping shit on the Bible, they're ipso facto intellectually superior to religious folk, then I want to distance myself as far from their tiny little brains as possible.

[Bizz]

I only read non-fiction.

[Septic_Porpoise]

the bible is great for everyone. agnostics can find reasons to remain agnostic, christians can find reasons to remain christian, and them there muslims can go straight to hell.

[Soup Nazi]

As long as you understand that the bible should not be interpreted in a literal sense, then yes, I would say the bible is worth reading. If you decide it should only be interpreted literally, then do not waste your time (this applies to fundamentalists and atheists alike). Otherwise, no matter your religious views, it is worth reading just to comprehend the impact it has had on western thought and civilization.

Though any area with an overwhelming use of the word "begat" can probably be skipped, cause it is teh lame.

[Archetype]

Started watching the second video with it, and they jokingly make the assertion that Christians are stupid because the religion is closer to a modern world view. That Jews have more strangeness to rectify; the old testament is so much more impossible means they have a greater sense of argumentation as a people. Not a bad theory, if you take American Evangelism for instance, it's a further simplified version of New World protestantism, itself an attempt at "updating" the Catholic faith. Ratzinger could only come out of Catholicism. Kinda makes me wonder who would be smarter, a fascist populace or a free populace.

Should it be taught in schools like Shakespeare? I don't know, I've never thought of it quite in this sort of context before. Despite the ideas of a separation of Church and State, I think, yeah. Why do I say that? Well, my sincere hope is that it forces more into their little brains, so that they use the fucking things. Then again, if we're talking about the school I went to, it would just make kids hate the Bible. A further "then again," we also only read 2 Billy Shakespeare plays in school, so...

The one issue I take in the article, is obviously a bit apologetic in nature,

When I complain to religious friends about how much He dismays me, I usually get one of two responses. Christians say: Well, yes, but this is all setup for the New Testament. Reading only the Old Testament is like leaving halfway through the movie. I'm missing all the redemption. If I want to find the grace and forgiveness and wonder, I have to read and believe in the story of Jesus Christ, which explains and redeems all. But that doesn't work for me. I'm a Jew. I don't, and can't, believe that Christ died for my sins. And even if he did, I still don't think that would wash away God's crimes in the Old Testament.


The second response tends to come from Jews, who razz me for missing the chief lesson of the Hebrew Bible, which is that we can't hope to understand the ways of God. If He seems cruel or petty, that's because we can't fathom His plan for us. But I'm not buying that, either. If God made me, He made me rational and quizzical. He has given me the tools to think about Him. So I must submit Him to rational and moral inquiry. And He fails that examination. Why would anyone want to be ruled by a God who's so unmerciful, unjust, unforgiving, and unloving?
For one, God may have made you rational and quizzical, but the bible does also say worship him. What possible interest would it hold to worship an endlessly simple and so overtly benevolent god after your question is answered?

Two, it should be evident that it's people's ideas that changed, not necessarily God. Thusly, the way the mightiest of mighties is portrayed changes drastically. Whereas in the Old Testament you get a mythical overseer who likes to stick his fork in the road at random, in the New Testament you get an ideal of will, and most importantly, a person to relate to. A man making a contract with God and expecting Him to hold to it is interesting, for sure, but it's Jesus fighting vampires that seems more likely.

Still, pretty interesting read, and a lot smoother than the last assholes. I don't feel so blatantly insulted.

[Bungle]

I like to tell people I was Christian until I saw the movie The Da Vinci Code.

[Archangel]

Wow, you're really fucking smart, basing your philosophy on movie adaptations of trash novels. And your grammar is so good, too!

[Archetype]

I think (hope) he was joking.

[Blue]

I like to tell people I was Christian until I saw the movie The Da Vinci Code.

http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/m/o/mol108/macros/moron.jpg

[Bungle]

Here's the hint it's a joke kids!

"I like to tell people..."

Am I the only one who lies to people for fun? Or who just fucking LOVES to enforce grammar, always? Or who starts cults based on movies based on bad fiction?

Man, I came to this forum hoping to connect. Now I just feel more distant from the world. . .

[Archetype]

Now you need to shut yer hole.

[BeeRand]

The bible is absolutely worth reading. Whether you're religious or not, you can't deny the historical value and impact the bible has had on human civilization. One could argue that the bible stands as a symbol for the human spirit (in the figurative sense). It represents our need to search outside the tangible to find greater meaning. You should read the bible for the same reason that you should read the Qur'an or the teachings of Buddha.

Not to mention that the bible is referenced in countless pieces of literature, film, etc. In the original post, Insomniac mentioned that the author of the article suggested it should be taught in schools. Well, parts of it were at my highschool (notably genesis). And I went to a public school believe it or not.

The bible is a piece of literature. And whether you believe it's God's word or simply a work of fiction is beside the point. Any work that has as much relevance (sociologically, culturally, etc.) as the bible is worth reading.

[Archangel]

I'll answer this with another question.


Is there any other work or cultural achievement which has influenced the world, especially Western civilisation, more - and more thoroughly - in the last two millennia?

The simple fact is that between, say, 400 and 1500, the Bible was the first reference point for EVERY European work of culture, and for a great many more until well into the 19th century - and for quite a few to this day. The Hagia Sophia? Bible. Perceval? Bible. Dante? Bible. Giotto? Bible. Albertus Magnus? Bible. Michelangelo? Bible. You get the idea.

People can talk about Dan Brown all the fuck they want, but the simple fact of the matter is that Leonardo depicted something described in Mark 14, Matthew 26, Luke 22, and I Corinthians 11. Nietzsche, Kant and Voltaire may have written against the Bible, but by doing so, they wrote about the Bible. Which you can only do if you've read the bloody thing.

The irony is that by discussing its perveived lack of worth, all the atheists are doing is perpetuate its continued significance.

God, those people must be jealous of Scripture. Because if Dawkins believes that people will be reading his pathetic scribblings in 2000 years, he's bloody delusional.

[Archangel]

The problem is the definition of the term "worth".


Is it "worth" your time if you want to increase your net "worth"? No. But if you judge culture by that aspect, you "deserve" getting fucking shot.

[avehicle-]

Yes, if u are religious, whether christian or not, u should know a little bit about christianity since it is one of the roots of western civilization
if u arent, u shoudl still read it to really determine whether u are truly not religious

[Trident]

So deep avehicle-.

Touch me.

No, further down.


Mmmmmm.