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

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36102385]Meanwhile he explicitly states that main reason it should be taught in schools is to tell children that it is a fucking terrible moral compass. Because it is.[/QUOTE] "Do not do unto others what you would not want them do unto you" Yeah terrible morals that is

I went to a Catholic school and in 4th grade the school gave us Bibles. I read parts of it and that's when I discovered it was all fucked.

[QUOTE=Jackald;36102474]It's a good idea. I don't see how anyone could read Exodus 21:7-11, Judges 21:10-24, Deuteronomy 13:13-19 and Nahum 1:2-8 and still decide to follow that religious text if they view it from an objective point of view and aren't, y'know, brainwashed since birth. [editline]27th May 2012[/editline] "If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her." - Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife." Deuteronomy 22:23-24 "When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. " - Exodus 21:7-11 I agree, good morals.[/QUOTE] Yeah the Bible is full of outdated and bigoted views, but it does tell you about history and society at the time, and anyway you'd ignore stuff like that just as you'd ignore outdated theories in a science textbook

[QUOTE=RobbL;36102555]Yeah the Bible is full of outdated and bigoted views, but it does tell you about history and society at the time,[/QUOTE] So um, why not just get history books that teach that, and [i]aren't[/i] full of outdated and bigoted views?

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;36102587]So um, why not just get history books that teach that, and [i]aren't[/i] full of outdated and bigoted views?[/QUOTE]They're not going to use the bible to teach, just to show what it is and how it's affected the world.

[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;36101645]Homosexuals are horrible, incest is cool and Jesus was allergic to seafood.[/QUOTE] Incest violates the bible too, dude.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;36102587]So um, why not just get history books that teach that, and [i]aren't[/i] full of outdated and bigoted views?[/QUOTE] The Bible is a source though, history textbooks aren't

penises on every page wait till he sees that, he'll think everyone is the anti christ

[QUOTE=Bean Shoot;36101929]It's not so that kids can learn about morality. It's the profound effect it had on English language and culture that's worth looking into. Also, the best way to shake people's faith is to actually make them read the Bible.[/QUOTE] I would only read it as a fiction book. Honestly, I don't believe in it at all. I would read it just like any other fairy tale if it didn't have soo many idolation but otherwise, it might be a very good read on many levels. Again, my personal opinion.

[QUOTE=Jackald;36102615]The bible should be studied as a historical text in the same way the Canterbury Tales are studied as a historical text, or the way Homer's Illiad is studied as a historical text. It should not be seen as a book of legend that gives insight into a period of time, not as a factual biography. [editline]27th May 2012[/editline] How did Adam and Eve's children create the entire human race?[/QUOTE] I dunno, but here are actual excerpts from the bible. Leviticus 18:6 “‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the Lord. 7 “‘Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her. 8 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father. 9 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere. 10 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter; that would dishonor you. 11 “‘Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father’s wife, born to your father; she is your sister. 12 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your father’s sister; she is your father’s close relative. 13 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your mother’s sister, because she is your mother’s close relative. 14 “‘Do not dishonor your father’s brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt. 15 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son’s wife; do not have relations with her. 16 “‘Do not have sexual relations with your brother’s wife; that would dishonor your brother. 17 “‘Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness. 18 “‘Do not take your wife’s sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.

I'm fine with the bible being in public schools so long as the koran, torah, and other religious texts are there. If they are to be used in education they all have to be taught subjectively.

Thanks for sourcing that chart and putting in a legend so I know what it means. Is red "bad" or "allowed"? What part of Deuteronomy do I look at? [editline]27th May 2012[/editline] Oh, you edited it with a legend. Anyways, that still doesn't specify which parts of Deuteronomy or which verses of Leviticus to look at. [editline]27th May 2012[/editline] Also, Leviticus 20 outlines [i]punishments[/i] for sins, not whether the act is a sin or not. If it's mentioned in Leviticus 18, but not in Leviticus 20, then it's still a sin, but with no explicitly outlined punishment.

[QUOTE=Jackald;36102752]Leviticus 18:7-11 Leviticus 20:11-21 Deuteronomy 22:30 Deuteronomy 27:20-23 Deuteronomy 22:30 Genesis 29:16 Genesis 29:23 Genesis 29:28 Ezekiel 22:10-11 Knock yourself out.[/QUOTE] The Deuteronomy verses are largely irrelevant because they are statements in the negative(you can't do this, versus what you should do), and they are fairly consistent with Leviticus. Anyways, the Genesis verses are also consistent with Leviticus because Laban is the uncle to Jacob, and it isn't expressly forbid to have sexual relations with your uncle's children. Cousins are not necessarily considered close relatives, for the sake of the bible. In fact that's how royal dynasties in Europe were allowed to inbreed so much, because cousin on cousin relations were considered distant enough to be allowable.

gg highlighting [QUOTE="Dawkins"]without the Bible as a moral compass, people would have no restraint against murder, theft and mayhem.[/QUOTE] without putting the whole quote of [QUOTE=Dawkins]I have even heard the cynically misanthropic opinion that, without the Bible as a moral compass, people would have no restraint against murder, theft and mayhem.[/QUOTE] OP is professional quote miner here

Also, that Ezekiel verse is taken out of context. That chapter is devoted to the condemnation of Jerusalem, not the encouragement of certain acts. [editline]27th May 2012[/editline] Ezekiel 22: 17 Then the word of the Lord came to me: 18 “Son of man, the people of Israel have become dross to me; all of them are the copper, tin, iron and lead left inside a furnace. They are but the dross of silver. 19 Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: ‘Because you have all become dross, I will gather you into Jerusalem. 20 As silver, copper, iron, lead and tin are gathered into a furnace to be melted with a fiery blast, so will I gather you in my anger and my wrath and put you inside the city and melt you. 21 I will gather you and I will blow on you with my fiery wrath, and you will be melted inside her. 22 As silver is melted in a furnace, so you will be melted inside her, and you will know that I the Lord have poured out my wrath on you.’” [editline]27th May 2012[/editline] I'm not saying the bible isn't shitty, or is consistent. I'm just saying that incest isn't allowed according to the bible. Except cousins, since god doesn't consider them close relatives I guess.

Well, I think the main argument that modern christians make is that above all else, you are not supposed to judge or punish other people for their sins. This is backed up in Matthew and John. The idea is since Jesus explicitly said this, then you must follow this above any other verse in the bible because Jesus is the lamb of god and his word is righteous. By "Bible Logic", homosexuality is a sin, but since Jesus said to love your neighbor and not judge, someone else being homosexual is absolutely none of your concern.

I support this move as long as it's put in the fiction section of the library.

People should follow their own moral compass, and probably will whether religious or not. People tend to cherry pick from all texts they read, because certain ideas speak to a person more than other ideas.

[QUOTE=Jackald;36102637]Besides, like I said, some of the bible is supposed to be the infallible word of God.[/QUOTE] The bible is not an infallible source, unlike the Koran it wasn't written by prophets, it was written by many different authors, any of whom could easily have added their own biases and opinions into parts of it. You have to remember that these authors had different backgrounds. Not all lived in the exact same place at the exact same time. Another fact is that the bible has been translated numerous times through multiple languages over time (depending on the part) and that what you're reading in your modern language is not necessarily exactly what they wrote.

[QUOTE=matt.ant;36101581]Leading atheist Richard Dawkins[/QUOTE] What. How can anyone be a "leading atheist". I'm pretty sure atheism isn't a contest or an organization.

[QUOTE=Jackald;36102990]But the bible also says the exact opposite of those things at different times. If you want I can go and grab quotes for you, but I think you can just believe me when I say that the bible contradicts itself on some pretty key issues like that.[/QUOTE] Yea, but what I'm saying is that Jesus' word cannot be contradicted. The laws of Moses are completely obsolete because the Messiah himself came and created a new covenant between man and god. Jesus says what is moral, and what the punishments for immorality are. [editline]27th May 2012[/editline] Either way, there might be some contradiction. However, I would much rather have people following the verses of Jesus that say not to judge, rather than following Leviticus.

Every single time I ever open the bible, I immediately read something absolutely absurd.

[QUOTE=RobbL;36102452]"Do not do unto others what you would not want them do unto you" Yeah terrible morals that is[/QUOTE] I know right Hammurabi's code and Ancient Chinese philosophy would fit RIGHT into the Bible. Like, RIGHT in there. It totally hasn't become a platitude generally ignored by the religious.

[QUOTE=RobbL;36102452]"Do not do unto others what you would not want them do unto you" Yeah terrible morals that is[/QUOTE] "kill the gays" superb moral guidance

It sounds like a good idea honestly. Even if you don't believe it, I find theology very interesting to study. I took a class specifically on the gospels last semester and it was one of my favorite classes.

I don't think that anything bad can come of reading the bible. People read the Greek Myths for fun, when they were religion back then. It's not as though schools (most) will be like "omg this bible is your new history kiddies".

[QUOTE=Jackald;36103209]How does an omnipotent omniscient being "change his mind" anyway? He seemed pretty wrathful back when he flooded the world and killed everyone, but then he's all nice in the new testament.[/QUOTE] Apparently God was still pretty upset with the human race and Jesus coming to Earth is what changed his mind. Even though they're the same person. Which kind of confuses me still.

[QUOTE=Jackald;36103209]How does an omnipotent omniscient being "change his mind" anyway? He seemed pretty wrathful back when he flooded the world and killed everyone, but then he's all nice in the new testament.[/QUOTE] Because god doesn't exist. It is a creation of imaginative people, and is therefore not bound to logic or consistency.

[QUOTE=Jackald;36102678]The Bible has some beautifully poetic parts in it. [/QUOTE] In what language though? Something that has been written and rewritten in countless languages and translated several times, so if it has poetic parts in it, I'm sure it's because the translator took the time to use poetic language.

[QUOTE=Fetret;36103258]In what language though? Something that has been written and rewritten in countless languages and translated several times, so if it has poetic parts in it, I'm sure it's because the translator took the time to use poetic language.[/QUOTE] The content itself is poetic IMO. There is plenty of irony, absurdity, and poetic "justice" in the bible.