Ok, so as previously mentioned in other posts... I have never had any indoctrination of any religion and therefore consider it absolute tosh, to coin a British phrase... But I've always been humble enough to admit where I'm wrong and change my views on certain aspects..
For example, I've had my mind changed on abortion, I'm not for it personally but do understand the arguements for both sides.
Nevertheless, I thought perhaps it is worth a thorough read and so I downloaded a PDF of The Bible (The New International Version).
I chose this as it is apparently the most read copy and was made using the very best manuscripts by theologians apparently...
I'll post my thoughts at various intervals so look for posts titled 'The Bible Experiment'.
The term experiment has nothing to do with the scientific method so please do not conflate this, it's merely addressing my venture to understand what all the fuss is about.
Wish me luck...
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Reading the kjv of the bible made me stop being a Christian.
Edit
Great and refreshing to actually see someone here with an open mind. Good luck, Randomhero
You don't know what open mind means, you've proved it again and again, and now once again. Which is bizarre because you can fucking Google it in like 3 seconds. Searches for truth can't spare 3 seconds to actually search for the truth, ironic or what. You also don't believe the bible, wow your post is a clusterfuck of fails on multiple levels.
I hope to do this with Quaran too if there is any legitimate English translations available.
Pointless, according to SFT their deity only speaks Arabic.
I'm sure there must be a reasonavke translation though that a majority is Muslim practioners accepts (Not necessarily just one dudes opinion on the internet).
Either way, I've always thought of myself as rational and fair minded, it's hypocritical of me to continue taking the puss out of religion without getting a better understanding.
That said, first few chapters are odd to say the least.
@Randomhero
There are many good and reasonable translations. Also, if you care to know what I think just ask. Don't let others give you my opinion.
Sure, feel free to comment... and I hope you will when I get around to the Quaran.
Could you suggest a link to the best English translations.
@Randomhero,
While I am sure there are a few good ones out there, personally, I would recommend “The Quran, translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali” since the English used in it is plain and straight forward English. It’s not old English if you know what I mean, easier to understand. I can suggest a few tips once you are ready, since the Quran is not compiled/put together in the order the verses were revealed it could get confusing at times if you go in thinking everything is in chronological order. Till then, good luck with your bible experiment.
Having read the first chapter of the book of Genesis, I'll avoid the scientific points that make a mockery of this piece of literature, as I'm sure it's been covered by fellow members.
However, I will ask...
- Why did it take seven days? This is a god that created the universe, surely our planet should have been a simple click of the fingers.
- Secondly, Why did God need to rest?
6, it took 6 ffs, he rested on the seventh. Wait a minute, what the fuck? Why does a deity with limitless power need rest? let alone a whole fucking day of rest? I smell bullshit...
The Bible isn't a science book, its literature. As literature, it is not meant to be taken literally.
Some theists take the Bible literally, but they are mixed up.
The bible is errant nonsense, desperately trying to rationalise it by pointing out it makes no sense unless 6 days really means 14+ billion years, is something of an obvious own goal. One would have to be delusional to think otherwise.
An omniscient deity that can't communicate any better than the ignorant prejudiced ravings of bronze and iron age patriarchal racist misogynists. Do behave, this is the most tired old theological cliche of them all. Right up there with SFT's idea of an omniscient deity being a monoglot. Do you even hear yourselves when you say these things?
I think you should find a dramatized audio version of the bible and listen through it, as opposed to reading it. Its generally easier to visualize the contents while listening. I also personally think that's how it was intended to be experienced; historically, reading was a skill only few learned, everyone else listened to readings. So I do think it was primarily written with that in mind, or for that purpose.
I've never read the Bhagavad Gita, so let me know when you start reading that and I'll join.
@Breezy
I learn and absorb better visually than auditorily, but then I am a visual learner in general. When I read a good book I pretty quickly get to the point where I do not even notice I am reading pages anymore and simply having a "movie" play out in my head.
Plus reading is much faster than speech, at least for me.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮ I am an atheist that always likes a good debate. ▮
▮ Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me. ▮
▮ Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016. ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Well when it comes to speed, apps like audible allow you to go pretty fast. I don't think I listen to any book slower than 1.5x. I do think reading is better than listening when you are trying to study or learn the details, as opposed to get the overall sense of the text, for that I think listening is better.
However, written language is different from spoken language. I think you can see that when you look at a transcript of a discussion or speech. There are books in the Bible that appear to have been dictated to a scribe, whose task it was to write it down. Given that the origin of such books is spoken rather than written, I do still think listening is the better option.
@Breezy
Those are good points you bring up. And I certainly have listened to "books on tape" when I have a long road trip by myself. I tend to stick to easy listening fantasy/sci fi books for that however, that do not require to much "thinking." And it is okay if I miss details as frequently they are not integral to the entire book.
Absolutely agree that the written language is different then spoken, both have their places and scenarios they are more useful for. For me to do an in depth analysis, the written word is absolutely superior for that. As you can spend as much time as you need on each sentence, paragraph or overall idea.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮ I am an atheist that always likes a good debate. ▮
▮ Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me. ▮
▮ Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016. ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
We just went over sonething interesting in class. Apparently after the printing press was invented, and people had individual access to books, they were still reading to themselves out loud. It took some time before people read to themselves silently.
@Breezy
Have not heard/read that before, makes sense though. Certainly the proliferation of reading and writing came much much later than speech and listening. And as reading and writing accelerated to be accessible to nearly everyone, I can only imagine new social constructs are needed. I also observe that many children when first learning to read, are encouraged to read out loud. My guess connecting the written word to the spoken word in our brains speeds up the process of learning to read and comprehend.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮ I am an atheist that always likes a good debate. ▮
▮ Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me. ▮
▮ Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016. ▮
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
I have to agree @LogicFTW...
The only time I've preferred an audio version to the written is when it comes to the works of Dawkins and Hitchens... simply because their voices transcend... in much the same way as David Attenborough.
Thank you for the advice Breezy, i've opted to read mainly for the fact that I adore reading and always have done.
Secondly, as stated above, I hear that this interpretation of the bible is formed from the highest quality manuscripts and I wouldn't want anything to get between that.
I understand there may be issues with how I interpret the passages but that's why I'm posting my thoughts on it.
I'll be trying to steer clear of the science side of it, as it'll taint my experience as after reading the first chapter you could close the book and call it a day for being so wrong from a scientific point of view... and it's probably been covered extensively already on here.
So again, I'll just try and use common sense, logic and rational thought to see what I agree with, what I disagree with and so on...
"I think you should find a dramatized audio version of the bible and listen through it, as opposed to reading it. Its generally easier to visualize the contents while listening."
I agree, I found Tolkien's Lord of The Rings Trilogy a real haul, thank fuck they made films about them, much more believable now.
Genesis 3,15
New International Version
And I will put enmity between you and the woman,
And between your offspring and hers;
He will crush your head,
And you will strike his heel.
New King James Version
And I will put enmity between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel.
King James Version
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman
And between thy seed and her seed
It shall bruise thy head
And thou shalt bruise his heel.
This is just one example of the widespread alteration of the meaning of the Hebrew text of the OT by modern translators where a more VIOLENT interpretation is preferred.
"It shall bruise they head"...IT is changed to HE... BRUISE is changed to CRUSH
"Bruise thy head" means something like "give you a headache" in the sense of causing problems in the Serpent's relationship with the woman and between their mutual offspring (conflict within the family) The ENMITY between the 'Serpent' and the woman.
Why's God so bothered about snakes?
What part of the male anatomy can be likened to a snake?
What often causes conflict within families?
Sex?
"And you shall bruise his heal" means that the FATHER shall drive away the eldest son ... whu is THE CHRIST.
The CHRIST is the (eldest) son of the FATHER ...
The primary image of Christianity is that of a naked man being tortured to death on a cross by (arranged by, using the Jews as his intrument) his father. In Christian families the FATHER is supposed to be the SUPREME AUTHORITY
Many of the texts used to compile the Koran that described punishments were altered to make the punishments more VIOLENT. The Koran was "constructed" sometime in the late 700s ... commissioned by the ruling elite of the time.
Just a few passing comments on chapter two whilst I'm here...
The Adam and Eve story immediately appears to have a possible contradiction in the opening chapter...
"Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth"
Then man is created, However during creation in chapter one...
"The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds"
Seems odd to say the least!
If God created Adam, not to mention the entirely of everything on the planet and within the cosmos... why would he need his rib to create Eve?
Snakes can speak?!
God says serpants will eat dust for all of their lives, yet they do not... could refer to the individual servant however.
FYI it's also easier and better to read as I have children (major distraction) and I can also refer back if necessary a lot easier.
Please feel free to comment on any of my thoughts, add any of your own.. or add clarifications.
Hey, Random! Have you noticed yet how god always seems to be asking questions about where people are? When Adam was hiding, why did god have to call him out? Why did he have to ask Cain where Abel was?
got omniscience?
Hey Tin-man,
Yes! I have that noted down actually, it's bloody odd If you ask me.
For me when I first read about what Tin-Man alluded to, my first thought was, "Proof your god is NOT omniscient."
rmfr
That is true. Though if you wish to get answers to these, best to ask Christians who know about the topic rather than atheists. Like I'd tell you that Genesis 1-11 has historically NOT been taken literally though they convey truth in a different manner. Kinda like, poetry where more colorful imagery is used to convey certain things.
Anyway, be sensitive to genre.
"best to ask Christians who know about the topic rather than atheists."
I must say this always makes me laugh, what esoteric knowledge is open to the credulous and their biased subjective interpretations, that isn't to those who possess the objective ability to doubt? Oh wait a minute, I seem to have unwittingly answered my own question.
Genesis is erroneous, and we know this because we now have objective facts to measure it against, unlike the authors, as of course an omniscient diety would by definition have to have had. No amount of nudge nudge wink wink, look for the hidden meaning is going to change this. One would need a motive (bias) to look for a hidden meaning, and of course a deity would need a motive to hide the meaning in erroneous superstitious nonsense, that just happens of course to accurately mirror the prejudices and ignorance of the humans, and the human cultures that produced this "immutable" truth / erroneous nonsense.
There is one other option, that an omniscient deity can't communicate a lucid accurate and definitive message that could not be misinterpreted. This is as nonsensical as many of the ideas communicated in the bible itself.
Pages