How could mentally ill person(s) have written the Bible?

99 posts / 0 new
Last post
arakish's picture
@ burningiris

@ burningiris

Beginning With Formalities

Welcome to our corner of the “WWW Sane Asylum.” The temperature is a cool 15,036°C. Just ask any theist.

The kitchen is the first door on the right. Just make sure to mark what is yours before putting it in the fridge and/or cabinets. There are certain somebody's who will take anything that is unmarked.

Do not drink any of those drink-looking bottles on bottom door shelf of the fridge. Those are specifically formulated for me and my Huorns.

The oil can belongs to Tin-Man. You don't want to mess with that. We all like to play as if we don't know what he does with it.

The bathroom is that last door on the left. If there is a banana peel on the knob, don't go inside. Long story, don't ask.

If you happen to find a pig-nose mask, please hide it as quickly as possible. Even if you have to stuff it in your pocket.

The back deck is in a small yard with a thick forest beyond it. If you see a tree moving in the forest, don't worry, that is just me tending my forest-garden.

So come right on in and set a spell. You are among friends. Or as the AR Logo says, “We are not just Atheists, we are atheists who give a shit!

======================================================================

Your Questions First

How could mentally ill person(s) have written the Bible?

How does anyone who suffers RSTD (Religious Stigmata Traumatized Disorder) even get through life in today's world without being thrown into the looney bin?

One thing to remember. The Bible was NEVER written. It was plagiarized from myths, legends, and faerie tales FAR! older than the Bible and Hebrews. Some thousands of years older. One example. The Noahacian Flood Myth was plagiarized from the Epic of Gilgamesh written ≅1150 years before. The Epic of Gilgamesh was plagiarized from the Epic of Atra-Hasis written ≅100 years before. The Epic of Atra-Hasis was plagiarized from the Epic of Ziusudra written ≅250 years before. The Epic of Ziusudra was plagiarized from the Genesis of Enridu written ≅200 years before. Hell, the Greek flood myths of Deucalion were written ≅300 before the Bible, literally at the same time the Hebrews first appeared in the Levant. The word "genesis" in the Genesis of Enridu, comes from the ancient word "tabzal." Just like the word "aloha" has different meanings in Hawai'ian, tabzal can be used to mean "genesis" or "to begin", or it can mean "ending."

It has always been my contention that they have mistranslated Genesis of Enridu, probably actually being The Ending of Enridu. However, this story mentions a great flood that washed down the valley, wiping out Enridu and many other cities. Archaeological evidence shows there was a catasclysmic flood in the Tigris and Euphrates flood plain ≅2900 BCE leaving behind a 7½ meter thick deposit of river sediment. That indicates one hell of a catastrophic flood. The Genesis of Enridu was written about 200 years later ≅2700 BCE. Each of the subsequent plagiarisms of the flood story just got bigger and bigger and bigger until it was global in nature. You know, just like those "The Fish That Got Away" stories. Did I tell you about the fish I lost that was THIS BIG!! ***arms spread as wide as possible***

The Bible was not written by mentally ill persons, it was plagiarized and re-written and re-translated and re-written and re-translated and re-written so many times, there is no truth left in the Bible.

Another factoid. Why do versions of the Septuagint (which includes the Pentateuch) written in Greek date back to ≅650 BCE and versions of the Pentateuch written in Hebrew only date back to 450 BCE? In other words, why are Greek versions of the Old Testament older than the Hebrew versions?

But, how could a mentally ill person have written something as great as the Bible?

Bible is great? Are you sure about that? The Bible is the most terrifying horror story ever written in all of history. Hell, the stories in the Bible scared me a hell of a lot worse than the HP Lovecraft, Edgar Allen Poe, others can't remember stories I was reading at the same time. Why was the Bible considered such a horror? Because everyone kept telling me it was real. I knew the other stories I was reading were fiction.

No. The Bible is not great.

But, really, how could mentally ill people have written the Bible?

They did not. Many persons plagiarized other stories, then they were compiled together into the most terrifying horror story ever written.

======================================================================

Your Comments

I've been pretty firm on my belief that belief in God is infantile narcissism, first posited by Freud.

I would tend to agree since I now define religious mental illness as RSTD (Religious Stigmata Traumatized Disorder). A very complex mental disorder similar to PTSD, but based in religion. Almost all Muslims qualify under this mental disease.

This would mean that everyone who believes in God is mentally ill.

Or mental disease.

I see the Bible as great literature yet if we believe in Freud and see belief in God as mental illness…

The Bible is NOT great literature. Never has been. Never shall be. No matter how many times they re-write it. Along with the Qu'ran, neither one would even pass if graded by a literature professor. Hell, I'd guarantee no literature professor, grading without bias, would even get past the first chapters before marking a big, fat "F" on them, then file them into File 13.

Have you actually read the Bible? While using critical thinking, logical and deductive reasoning, and rational and analytical thought?

I have trouble seeing how a deluded persons could have written the best book ever written.

Perhaps they were not deluded except for re-writing the stories they were plagiarizing.

Plus, I've read books (including the Bible) and Jesus didn't really seem to be mentally ill, just kind.

Nope. Heysoos was a pot-smoking hippy also getting the occasional poppy seeds and shrooms. Heysoos was just as horrible as the god of the Old Testament.

John 10:30 – I and the Father are one.
John 10:38 – The Father is in me and I am in the Father.
John 14:9 – Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.

Additionally, if Heysoos, if he even existed, were not mentally ill, then why did he never say that slavery was a bad thing?

I don't believe he was schizophrenic or anything like that but had good parents.

If you believe in Trinitarianism, yes, Heysoos was as schizophrenic as they come. Hell to have The Father and The Holy Spirit within the one body of The Son, hell anybody would be suffering from schizophrenic and dissociative delusional disorder. Heysoos was just as wonko as his daddy who raped a virgin.

Help please.

Hang around. You will get plenty.

rmfr

Cognostic's picture
@Arakish. Thank you for

@Arakish. Thank you for that. It saved me the trouble. And add the idea that the BIBLE is not a book. It is a collection of ancient books written over a period of thousands of years with a whole lot of other books also written as gospels for early Christians NOT INCLUDED within its pages.

arakish's picture
Also did some hunting for you

Also did some hunting for you.

Matching your screen name, this and the next two replies will offer something for you to use as an avatar.

This one is actually named "Burning Iris."

rmfr

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
arakish's picture
This one is named "Fire Iris.

This one is named "Fire Iris."

rmfr

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
arakish's picture
This one is named "Burning

This one is named "Burning Bronze."

I did this because I love flowers. Ain't gotten out and done anything in my flower garden yet. We still occasionally get snow. Besides planting where I am at is not until after May 15.

Enjoy.

rmfr

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
Tin-Man's picture
Re: OP - "How could mentally

Re: OP - "How could mentally ill person(s) have written the Bible?"

Crayons, obviously.

dogalmighty's picture
Nope. they used charcoal, and

Nope. they used charcoal, and ate the crayons.

Tin-Man's picture
@doG Re: "Nope. they used

@doG Re: "Nope. they used charcoal, and ate the crayons."

Well, hell, that actually makes sense. After all, considering they have to put the writing utensil in their mouths to write (Those snug little "hug myself" jackets aren't exactly equipped for writing ease.), it is only natural that a few crayons would get eaten. And charcoal just isn't quite as tasty.... (Uh, so I've been told... *looking up and away*... *whistling innocently*...)

SeniorCitizen007's picture
Romas 1, 1-17

Romans 1, 1-17

Paul, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God (which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father. First, I thank my God for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world. For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers ... etc. the rest of Romans 1, 1-17 has no further Christian interpolations.

After removing the Christian interpolations from these verses one is left with a body of (Greek) text containing exactly 1000 letters. The word God is used 8 times. In each instance the first letter of the word God, or the first letter of its definite article when it has one, is an even number of letters from the beginning of the text. When these positions are added together and divided by 8 the first letter of the Greek word for the "now", the "present moment" is identified. Statistically the likelihood of this happening by chance is remote. The text was deliberately constructed this way to identify the author's concept of God ...

This text was also divided into 4 sections ... each of 51 words.

Now I'm going to make a "wild" claim ... it was this author who wrote the original text of Mark. Someone later altered things so that he came to seen as worshipping his own creation (i.e. Jesus, KIng of the Jews)

So ... who was Paul?

Major chunks of Mark, as we have it today, are interpolated text designed to alter the storyline.. It can be seen that the author who altered Mark did not understand some of what the original author was saying ... it was "too deep" for him.

algebe's picture
@burningiris: I have trouble

@burningiris: I have trouble seeing how a deluded persons could have written the best book ever written.

Whether the Bible is the best book ever written is a matter of opinion. For one thing it's a translation from several different languages rather than an original work in English. For another, how can possibly compare every book ever written and decide which is the best? What criteria do we use? I think that "Gulliver's Travels" is better written and offers deeper insights into human society and life than the Bible.

As to the mental state of the authors, well many authors have suffered from (and perhaps were inspired by) mental illnesses. Kawabata Yasunari and Mishima Yukio were both Nobel laureates who later killed themselves (by seppuku/harakiri in Mishima's case). There's also a theory that poets are especially prone to depression. It's called the Sylvia Plath effect. Many great writers were drug addicts and alcoholics.

I believe that without madness, depression, and mental illness, there'd be a lot less great literature. So yes, the Bible could have been and almost certainly was written by people who were off their rockers to some extent. We can perhaps pity them for the sufferings that inspired their creativity. I have no pity for the fools that take every word they wrote as absolute truth.

Sky Pilot's picture
OK, which English language

OK, which English language version of the Bible do you like most?

arakish's picture
Diotrophes: "OK, which

Diotrophes: "OK, which English language version of the Bible do you like most?"

None of them. They are all the most terrifying anthology of plagiarized horror stories ever written.

rmfr

Sky Pilot's picture
arakish,

arakish,

"They are all the most terrifying anthology of plagiarized horror stories ever written."

Not all of the stories are horror stories. Several of them are secular in nature and discuss the common human condition.

arakish's picture
Diotrephes: "Not all of the

Diotrephes: "Not all of the stories are horror stories."

Prove it. Since they are all lies, that makes all of the horror stories.

rmfr

algebe's picture
@Diotrephes OK, which English

@Diotrephes OK, which English language version of the Bible do you like most?

The King James version. It was produced by a government committee, which extensively plagiarized the earlier translation by William Tyndale, who was brutally executed by the government for producing it.

I think it's the perfect symbol of religious morality.

Sky Pilot's picture
Algebe,

Algebe,

"The King James version. It was produced by a government committee, which extensively plagiarized the earlier translation by William Tyndale, who was brutally executed by the government for producing it."

The 1611 KJV is based on the 1560 edition of the Geneva Bible. That was the first Bible to use numbered verses to the chapters. The 1611 KJV is 95% textually the same as the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible is 90% based on Tyndale's Bible.

The KJV that is in use now is a revision of the 1769 Revised Oxford Edition of the 1611 KJV.
https://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/index.html

Sky Pilot's picture
Food for thought =
Sapporo's picture
SomeBODIEShero: @OM

SomeBODIEShero: @OM

Like I said, authenticity or atrocity has no bearing on your normal judgement of fiction books to be great literature. Your bias towards religion makes your windshield so blurry you will result in a fiery crash if you are not careful. Listen. I admit, there is no historical basis for the Bible, there is no truth to the Bible. Jesus didn’t exist, the flood is an exaggeration and Christ didn’t exist. So what? Is truth necessary for a book of fiction? Last I checked the answer was no. The only thing preventing the Bible from being even considered as a great work is your conceited self affirming bias. It’s sad really. A true “scholar” admits what is true. An amateur like yourself pretends to be about facts except when it is about the religion he disagrees with the most. Put aside the fact that you were raped by a priest. That doesn’t bother us. But don’t use that as annexcuse to ignore the truth. That the Bible is a great book.

You have resorted to ad hominems and boasts about your supposed qualifications rather than facts.

You have not actually said what subject your B.S. was in and provided proof of your qualification. You have also not demonstrated that you are anything other than an amateur yourself.

With the arts, excellence is a matter of opinion, although could conceivably be measured by some favored metric that could be objectively determined.

You talk of the bible being a "fantastic piece of literature" in the same breath that you mention your alleged B.S. qualification. What "Bachelor of Science" subject is actually relevant to expertise on literature? Bookbinding?

SomeBODIEShero's picture
@Sapporo

@Sapporo

"You have resorted to ad hominems and boasts about your supposed qualifications rather than facts."

False. I did not boast. And I did not say they were qualifiers. My original comment was that I subjectively believed the Bible to be great literature. Then after I was told my opinion is not valid BECAUSE I am not formally educated, I simply responded with my education level. I never said having a Bachelor's degree made me more of an "expert" than anyone here.

"You have not actually said what subject your B.S. was in and provided proof of your qualification."

False. In the same post about having a B.S., I stated it was a B.S. in Biology. I also had a focus on Chemistry and Philosophy.

"You have also not demonstrated that you are anything other than an amateur yourself."

This is true. Except I never claimed to be anything other than an amateur.

"With the arts, excellence is a matter of opinion, although could conceivably be measured by some favored metric that could be objectively determined."

I agree. While I never intended to suggest the Bible is OBJECTIVELY great literature, I said my opinion and included a few reasons why I believed it.

Sapporo's picture
SomeBODIEShero: @Sapporo

SomeBODIEShero: @Sapporo

"You have resorted to ad hominems and boasts about your supposed qualifications rather than facts."

False. I did not boast. And I did not say they were qualifiers. My original comment was that I subjectively believed the Bible to be great literature. Then after I was told my opinion is not valid BECAUSE I am not formally educated, I simply responded with my education level. I never said having a Bachelor's degree made me more of an "expert" than anyone here.

"You have not actually said what subject your B.S. was in and provided proof of your qualification."

False. In the same post about having a B.S., I stated it was a B.S. in Biology. I also had a focus on Chemistry and Philosophy.

"You have also not demonstrated that you are anything other than an amateur yourself."

This is true. Except I never claimed to be anything other than an amateur.

"With the arts, excellence is a matter of opinion, although could conceivably be measured by some favored metric that could be objectively determined."

I agree. While I never intended to suggest the Bible is OBJECTIVELY great literature, I said my opinion and included a few reasons why I believed it.

You are correct, I missed the part where you said what your B.S. was in, and overlooked the context in which "being educated" was being discussed in the thread.

Taste is certainly subjective, and it would not be straightforward to make a case for the bible being great literature simply because a list of well-regarded authors have mentioned it.

Of the list of authors you mentioned ("Chrétien de Troyes, John Milton, Charles Dickens, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Leo Tolstoy, Charlotte Bronte, Herman Melville, Mark Twain, Lord Byron, John Steinbeck, Ernest Hemingway, Toni Morrison, and William Faulkner."):

I have read works by all of them. On Goodreads, for Chrétien de Troyes, Milton, Morison, and Faulkner: I have not given a single one of their works at least a four star rating. That is of course my opinion. A number of Dickens' vast collection of works I find mediocre. Hemingway generally I cannot stand his writing. Faulkner is a little interesting, but my not my kind of author. If you want to judge popular opinion, then Moby Dick does especially badly on Goodreads: Ulysses is another example. By comparison, bestsellers of recent years generally get ratings that are far higher than the most popular works published in previous centuries. Also, even authors such as Shakespeare have their "high-brow" critics - Tolstoy was not a fan of Shakespeare, for example. Whereas Stephen King is a fan of JK Rowling.

As for the bible: I have to give it 1 star when considered as a whole - considering the overall message/s and my view of its immorality. There are books of verse like Psalms that I can see some merit in, also the Ecclesiastes.When it comes to a book like that of Job: it seemed like a possible "4 star" to me, but the ending completely ruined it for me. Genesis and Exodus and Revelation are great works of fantasy, but when I consider the immorality...how can I highly regard it? But I do not doubt it has been influential and that it had an "had an inestimable impact on world culture" - however, when you said this, you only implied it in a positive sense. Plato's The Republic, Ptolemy's Almagest, Machiavelli's The Prince, The Communist Manifesto, and Mao's Little Red Book have all "had an inestimable impact on world culture".

SomeBODIEShero's picture
@saparro

@saparro

I have to congratulate you on being the most reasonable and honest poster on this thread. I understand your position and appreciate it as such.

I’m not quite understanding of your question though.

rat spit's picture
Are you a “trained” Biologist

Are you a “trained” Biologist. Ahahahahahahaha. Get it? “Trained”? LOL

Sapporo's picture
@SomeBODIEShero

@SomeBODIEShero
How many forums have you been to countering those who consider books such as In Search of Lost Time, Moby Dick, the qur'an, The Republic, and Atlas Shrugged to be garbage?

arakish's picture
Atlas Shrugged is a damn good

Atlas Shrugged is a damn good book. Just re-read a couple years ago. Currently I am ready Terry Goodkind's The Sword Truth novels. Great reads.

I have to agree with your assessments of Hemingway and Faulkner. Good authors, but their writing styles are almost as boring a read as the Bible.

Then again, my tastes in books tends to be science, science fiction, and some fantasy. One book I keep reading and re-reading is How Does Earth Works (Amazon). There are others I continuously read and reference in my papers. But, How Does Earth Work was co-authored by the professor I mentored under for my volcanology degree. I also attended some of the lectures given by Aurora Pun. She is good.

The Encyclopedia of Volcanoes is another good one.

Many of my previous geology and volcanology textbooks are still enjoyable reads for me. Many find me nuts for actually enjoying such books. But what can I say... Working at/with YVO kind of makes it a requirement.

rmfr

Kataclismic's picture
I don't think it's mental

I don't think it's mental illness... just an underdeveloped mind. A child's mind. Once you mature, you can understand the difference between reality and fantasy in this day and age, but maybe they just couldn't. Maybe many still can't today.

David Killens's picture
I do not describe the

I do not describe the individuals the stories were written around as mentally ill ... by the standards of their times. But if any of those individuals were suddenly poofed onto Times Square, they would make headlines as unstable paranoid psychotic murderers.

For both Old and New Testament days, it was a brutal landscape. Old Testament was created by barbaric nomads, where the leader held power by absolute control and unrestrained brutality. And the new testament encompasses the Roman days, and that empire was definitely brutal and cruel.

One pivotal character in the development of the bible was Roman Emperor Constantine. His life is a story of cruel brutality that would fit neatly into Game of Thrones. He was also the person who allowed himself to be baptized on his death bed, and he also called the First Council of Nicaea, which was the first effort to attain consensus in the Church. That was when most of the biblical story lines were frozen. Anything that came after were revisions, edits, and of course, redactions.

I do not consider most modern christians mentally ill, almost all are decent and sane people. But they have been conned, peer pressure confines their vision, and they live in ignorance, not really absorbing the cruel crap in the bible. When some priest whispers in your ears for all of your life that "God is love", you either disregard or do not absorb the cruel stories contained in the bible.

This god decided to wipe out all of humanity, men, women, and children with the exception of one small family. That is one very nasty story.

Sadly, for most christians the story of Noah's ark is more like this to them ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x_QbVDlLbI

Cognostic's picture
How mentally ill must a

How mentally ill must a person be to have his or her questions answered over and over and over again and continue asking the same questions? Is it true that some people are incapable of learning? Just wondering?

arakish's picture
Cognostic: “How mentally ill

Cognostic:How mentally ill must a person be to have his or her questions answered over and over and over again and continue asking the same questions? Is it true that some people are incapable of learning? Just wondering?

Can't answer that one for you. You will need to direct this to such individuals as:

  • Searching for Truth
  • AJ777
  • SomeBODIESHero
  • catholicray
  • God is AWESOME
  • Grace
  • Jo
  • JoC
  • GabrielSerafin
  • In Spirit
  • HumbleThinker
  • fiat
  • Maddie
  • Dan
  • Pistós
  • rosedjan
  • HIMELO
  • sourcecodewizard
  • Great Hope
  • John 69 Breezy

Just to list a few of the most recent fruitcakes to visit here.

Urban Legend: There are only 9 Fruitcakes in the world that just keep getting sent to others because no one wants to eat those nasty things.

rmfr

rat spit's picture
Yay! I didn’t make the list

Yay! I didn’t make the list and I am the only one here professionally diagnosed as “insane” (admittedly - in any case).

Ha ha. Those fuckers said I wouldn’t make it; said I was a nobody. Well, look at rat spit now. Muwhahaha.

I’m a special kind of crazy, aren’t I.

Tin-Man's picture
@Rat Spit Re: "I’m a special

@Rat Spit Re: "I’m a special kind of crazy, aren’t I."

Well, duh! Why else do you think you fit in so well around here, Ratty?... *chuckle*... But don't go gettin' such a big head about it. You ain't any more "special crazy" than any of the rest of us. Still, unlike the others on that list, it is actually fun having you around. Your humor and attitude blend in nicely... (as far as I am concerned, at least). Besides, if you weren't around, who else would we have to keep us updated about the shenanigans of The OverLord and The Evil One? Stay cool, rodent friend.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.