Richard Dawkins backs plans for a bible in every school - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Lankist;36122071] Pretty sure there were still polytheistic pagan sects at that point. [editline]29th May 2012[/editline] that is until they were all murdered[/QUOTE] Being a semite isn't about religion, it's about heritage. All semites trace their heritage to Abraham, and by the criteria alone they are considered god's chosen people. It just seems silly that the jewish holy texts paint such a bad picture of the supposed chosen people.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36114426]First of all we're hovering back and forth between catholicism, and catholics sort of hate the king james bible. second of all, the king james bible was like fucking fifteen hundred years after the book had been written.[/QUOTE]Ok so what, this article is about teaching the King James Bible in class. You said the bible is poorly written and left it at that and I asked why. I don't know what other bibles people use but I'm pretty sure that is the most common English version and pretty common in general. What about it is poorly written?

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36124093]Ok so what, this article is about teaching the King James Bible in class. You said the bible is poorly written and left it at that and I asked why. I don't know what other bibles people use but I'm pretty sure that is the most common English version and pretty common in general. What about it is poorly written?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;36121634]I'll leave it at this: the bible has a run-on sentence that lasts for around [I]two-hundred and twenty words[/I], and a third of them are "begat".[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Camundongo;36123637]Catholicism and Protestantism have always had a political bent with their fights with each other. Protestantism itself was founded to free Henry VIII from the political influence of the Pope, so he basically could do as he pleased. The politics and religion in Ireland (and Britain as a whole, to a degree) have been tied together for so long now it's now impossible to say that the Troubles were solely political.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure Martin Luther founded protestantism (Lutherenism), and he was in Germany not England. Henry VIII did Anglicanism, which is a form of protestantism.

[QUOTE=RobbL;36118490]What I don't get Lankist is how you're so against just appreciating the Bible as a literary work that also represents and tells us about the society that wrote it[/QUOTE] Twilight is a literary work. And it certainly tells us a lot about society.

[QUOTE=joes33431;36126735]Twilight is a literary work. And it certainly tells us a lot about society.[/QUOTE] It tells us that teenage girls are apparently turned on by blood sucking corpses. As for the bible, it doesn't tell us much. Except that ancient European society was comprised mostly of vicious killers.

[QUOTE=Melkor;36126776]It tells us that teenage girls are apparently turned on by blood sucking corpses. As for the bible, it doesn't tell us much. Except that ancient European society was comprised mostly of vicious killers.[/QUOTE] Oh you're edgy

[QUOTE=RobbL;36130826]Oh you're edgy[/QUOTE] I didn't realize pointing out the obvious was considered edgy. But then again, I'm not nearly as versed in bullshit as you are. I suppose you think all those heretics burned themselves right?

[QUOTE=Melkor;36135987]I didn't realize pointing out the obvious was considered edgy. But then again, I'm not nearly as versed in bullshit as you are. I suppose you think all those heretics burned themselves right?[/QUOTE] If you knew the reasoning behind stuff like that you would realize the reason people were burned and tortured isn't as simple as religion. Religion was horrible, it was the justification used for so many atrocities in the middle ages and renaissance. However, it was just a justification, and not the reason these things were done in the first place.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36136967]If you knew the reasoning behind stuff like that you would realize the reason people were burned and tortured isn't as simple as religion. Religion was horrible, it was the justification used for so many atrocities in the middle ages and renaissance. However, it was just a justification, and not the reason these things were done in the first place.[/QUOTE] No, the fact that some of the killings were politically motivated doesn't suddenly absolve Christianity of responsibility for the countless killings of atheists and Jews over the course of European history. Many of them were carried out by mobs of villagers who had no other motivation than their belief in Christianity and a desire for violence.

[QUOTE=Melkor;36137111]No, the fact that some of the killings were politically motivated doesn't suddenly absolve Christianity of responsibility for the countless killings of atheists and Jews over the course of European history. Many of them were carried out by mobs of villagers who had no other motivation than their belief in Christianity and a desire for violence.[/QUOTE] This was done through an attitude perpetuated by the Catholic Church. I don't know how big into history you are, but the Church was a whole lot more than simply a spiritual guide for the souls of Europe. Europe itself was, in some ways, the Kingdom of Christianity, with the Pope as the supreme ruler. Heretics, muslims, jews, pagans, these people were considered threats to a Papal Hegemony in Europe, so the Church took active measures to thwart their influence, and encourage the devout to take up arms against these people. Religion was a justification, but the violent thoughts can be traced back to a power hungry political power that wanted to expand its influence and destroy its threats.

Most things start out nice and then some guy comes up and says "let's use this to do a bunch of shitty things"

[QUOTE=person11;36137304]Most things start out nice and then some guy comes up and says "let's use this to do a bunch of shitty things"[/QUOTE] Except that the bible was never nice and supported torture and murder from the beginning. You can't just pin this all on the Catholic Church when the bible actively supports the killing of non believers. If you want a good peaceful religion try Jainism.

You think the Bible was the beginning? The Bible was practically the End, once it was standardized.

[QUOTE=person11;36137406]You think the Bible was the beginning? The Bible was practically the End, once it was standardized.[/QUOTE] The end of the old testament. Which was still considered holy law.

And you think that those were the original ideas behind religion? My point is that corruption comes after conception. Meaning that the anti gay and non believer stuff probably came up after the other stuff. Obviously I can't prove this. It just seems to be how most cultures and movements start.

[QUOTE=Melkor;36137399]Except that the bible was never nice and supported torture and murder from the beginning. You can't just pin this all on the Catholic Church when the bible actively supports the killing of non believers. If you want a good peaceful religion try Jainism.[/QUOTE] The bible also helped to create a standardized set of rules for a society to follow. It's not the best set of rules ever, but its significance as a tool to encourage societal cohesion can't be ignored. The idea that "this is righteous behavior that all people of Israel should follow" is very important from a cultural and historical perspective. It's similar to how Hammurabi's Code and the Roman Legal System were considered incredibly important to learn about, even if Hammurabi's Code wasn't very fair. These things play an incredible role in societies and downplaying them because you might not particularly like the specifics is an attitude that espouses ignorance of a very important part of human history. There are definitely two ways to look at the bible, the first is to look at it as a book of morals and religion, and judge it based on the relevant attributes it displays in that regard. I think most of us can be in agreement that the bible isn't a very good place to get your morality, and that the abrahamic religions aren't a very consistent source for spiritual guidance. However, the second way to look at the bible is as a cultural and historical phenomena that happened to inadvertently record very important attitudes and ideas pertaining to the authors themselves, as well as its importance as a tool in politics, religion, culture, law, and trade. Also, I would ask you to keep an open mind about the effects of the bible. If history teaches us anything, its that situations in our past is rarely as black and white as we like to think of them. Instead of hating our past, we should look at it objectively, and see how and why we failed, and how and why we succeeded in any facet. Someone might be quick to judge the middle ages as a period of murder, violence, and ignorance, but that analysis forgets that the middle ages helped to herald in the modern world as we know it. You have to take the bad with the good, and the good with the bad.

woah what the fuck Jainism? ahahah they are the most sexist people ever

The problem here is that people are picking phrases out of the bible and attacking them out of context. Most of the stuff in the old testament (actually almost all of it) are myths and fables with moral [I]meanings[/I], like Aesop's fables. Many of them are cruel and are about murder and so on, but that's not the point. The Bible isn't a list of to do's and to don'ts. Incest, murder, homophobia, slavery and such happen in the Bible, that doesn't mean that it approves of them. You really need to study it to find the meaning of each part, it's utterly pointless to pick and criticize paragraphs. Sure, it has bigoted points of view but not as many as people think. For example, there's no incest between Adam and Eve since they represent the men and wimen of the human race, not two individuals.

[QUOTE=KlaseR;36137728]The problem here is that people are picking phrases out of the bible and attacking them out of context. Most of the stuff in the old testament (actually almost all of it) are myths and fables with moral [I]meanings[/I], like Aesop's fables. Many of them are cruel and are about murder and so on, but that's not the point. The Bible isn't a list of to do's and to don'ts.[/QUOTE] Leviticus and Deuteronomy are actually checklists of what you are not allowed to do, and the punishment for breaking those rules. The books of Exodus and Genesis are meant to be historical, giving background as to how the people of Israel came to be. The prophetic books get more into fables and allegories. The bible is complicated, it [i]is[/i] a list of do's and don'ts in some places, and isn't in others.

[QUOTE=KlaseR;36137728]The problem here is that people are picking phrases out of the bible and attacking them out of context. Most of the stuff in the old testament (actually almost all of it) are myths and fables with moral [I]meanings[/I], like Aesop's fables. Many of them are cruel and are about murder and so on, but that's not the point. The Bible isn't a list of to do's and to don'ts.[/QUOTE] Along with a bit of it, like parts of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, were records of laws at that time which were added to the Torah so that the people would have it, as many Jews intently studied and memorized the Torah. They aren't "commands of God" or meant to instruct modern Christians, as many people who attack them think.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36137770] The bible is complicated, it [I]is[/I] a list of do's and don'ts in some places, and isn't in others.[/QUOTE] exactly. in some places yes , but not all of it. It seems like people here are just picking phrases out of context and disagreeing with them, discarding simbolism and metaphores.

[QUOTE=DudeGuyKT;36137791]Along with a bit of it, like parts of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, were records of laws at that time which were added to the Torah so that the people would have it, as many Jews intently studied and memorized the Torah. They aren't "commands of God" or meant to instruct modern Christians, as many people who attack them think.[/QUOTE] Ooh, yes they are. The rules of Leviticus and Deuteronomy are Mosaic Law, which was supposedly handed down to Moses directly from god. They are meant to be interpreted as the supreme law of the people of Israel.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;36137817]Ooh, yes they are. The rules of Leviticus and Deuteronomy are Mosaic Law, which was supposedly handed down to Moses directly from god. They are meant to be interpreted as the supreme law of the people of Israel.[/QUOTE] They are? Huh, I guess I misunderstood. Thanks for the correction.

[QUOTE=person11;36137725]woah what the fuck Jainism? ahahah they are the most sexist people ever[/QUOTE] So were the Christians. At least Jainism doesn't advocate murder.

[QUOTE=KlaseR;36137812]exactly. in some places yes , but not all of it. It seems like people here are just picking phrases out of context and disagreeing with them, discarding simbolism and metaphores.[/QUOTE] But there is no symbolism and metaphor in Leviticus. It's the divine law. If you want to argue about Job, or Jonah, or Cain, or Isaiah, then that's where we can start talking about metaphors and symbolism.

[QUOTE=Melkor;36137835]So were the Christians. At least Jainism doesn't advocate murder.[/QUOTE] Yes. Every new idea or culture or movement is corrupted by the Vices of men. I guess that is why it is easier for me to see the good in things, since the bad will always be somewhat present in all cultures. And Jainists are even worse. I will have to find the excerpts of their holy texts but they seriously hated women.

[QUOTE=Melkor;36137835]So were the Christians[/QUOTE] Like I said pages ago, read up on Zoroastrianism. That religion is pretty fucking chill. The idea behind it is that positive thoughts are good, violent thoughts are bad. When you get to the afterlife whatever you put out into the world is what you get, you form your own heaven or hell. There are no arbitrary rules, if you're a good person you have a good afterlife. In the end it doesn't matter anyways because when god kills all the bad spirits he will re-unite all the souls with it so that everything lives in peace and harmony.

it was something like "curse the unholy women, all of them use their bosoms and swaying hips to convince righteous men to do evil, they are the devils race etc etc" I am pretty sure there must have been something in there about being violent to women but I forgot exactly where so I won't try to confirm that part.

I mean that religion is why the Persian Empire was so chill. Their religion didn't call for holy war or destroying heathens. It called for you to live a just and peaceful life, and to let other people live a just and peaceful life.