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

[QUOTE=person11;36112458]The bible inspired me to be conciliatory and nice, like I've been doing now. It taught me that it was not a book of stupid shit and that it taught people what I know is right.[/QUOTE] But how were you able to distinguish between the "conciliatory bible" and the "rape and murder bible" in the first place? [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=RobbL;36112472]Why isn't it enough to say you don't believe in Christianity and leave it there?[/QUOTE] Why is it too much to express more? Because I might offend you? I'm sorry, but I am not compelled to be inoffensive. If Christians can talk about learning from Jesus' example, I can call Jesus a terrorist. (And I can back it up with biblical verse, too.)

And Lankist, you seem to be arguing in Black and White.

[QUOTE=person11;36112487]And Lankist, you seem to be arguing in Black and White.[/QUOTE] Elaborate.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36112474]But how were you able to distinguish between the "conciliatory bible" and the "rape and murder bible" in the first place? [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] Why is it too much to express more? Because I might offend you? I'm sorry, but I am not compelled to be inoffensive. If Christians can talk about learning from Jesus' example, I can call Jesus a terrorist. (And I can back it up with biblical verse, too.)[/QUOTE] It was pretty easy to distinguish between them. While melt of the book espoused compassion and evenheadedness, only a select few passages mentned slavery and hating gay people etc. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;36112493]Elaborate.[/QUOTE] You make large sweeping statements about the Bible being bad

[QUOTE=person11;36112506]It was pretty easy to distinguish between them. While melt of the book espoused compassion and evenheadedness, only a select few passages mentned slavery and hating gay people etc. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] You make large sweeping statements about the Bible being bad[/QUOTE] Melt of the book is actually fairly violent. At least throughout the introductory books. The verses that espouse compassion and virtue are buried in mounds of religious sacrifice, holy violence, and execution/persecution of "idolators" and "whores". [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] There are cool stories, sure, but they are cool in the sense that they might make an interesting action or drama movie. Not that there is any real lesson to be gleamed from it.

[QUOTE=person11;36112506]It was pretty easy to distinguish between them. While melt of the book espoused compassion and evenheadedness, only a select few passages mentned slavery and hating gay people etc.[/QUOTE] But why? Why were you able to distinguish between them if you weren't already a moral person? The point is that you already knew right-and-wrong without the Bible. You didn't learn anything, you already knew right-and-wrong. You could glean the exact same things from anywhere, because you already know them. There's nothing special about that one book.

The only time I ever read a bible was when I tried to find the quote from the number of the beast

[QUOTE=Lankist;36112624]But why? Why were you able to distinguish between them if you weren't already a moral person? The point is that you already knew right-and-wrong without the Bible. You didn't learn anything, you already knew right-and-wrong. You could glean the exact same things from anywhere, because you already know them. There's nothing special about that one book.[/QUOTE]Honestly, as bad as it is to say, we really can only can glean those morals because the Bible and other religious texts made them widespread. We only know of a world where they're commonplace. I'm not saying the Bible is the only way to be a moral person, but without it we wouldn't really have had basic foundations for morals for a longer time.

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;36112805]Honestly, as bad as it is to say, we really can only can glean those morals because the Bible and other religious texts made them widespread. We only know of a world where they're commonplace. I'm not saying the Bible is the only way to be a moral person, but without it we wouldn't really have had basic foundations for morals for a longer time.[/QUOTE] No they didn't. Morality was widespread prior to the Bible. The Ten Commandments are just ripped off of the Hammurabi Code. The Golden Rule has developed independently in every corner of the world. The Bible did not lay the foundations for morality.

[QUOTE=Jad Hinto;36112805]Honestly, as bad as it is to say, we really can only can glean those morals because the Bible and other religious texts made them widespread. We only know of a world where they're commonplace. I'm not saying the Bible is the only way to be a moral person, but without it we wouldn't really have had basic foundations for morals for a longer time.[/QUOTE] The fact that certain morals have been adopted independently in different cultures lends no credence to your assertion.

[QUOTE=Kalibos;36101686]i think they would the bible's full of [B]MURDER[/B][/QUOTE] Sampson was a cool guy, he killed a whole lot of people with an ass's jawbone. Being a viking is still better in my opinion.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36112624]But why? Why were you able to distinguish between them if you weren't already a moral person? The point is that you already knew right-and-wrong without the Bible. You didn't learn anything, you already knew right-and-wrong. You could glean the exact same things from anywhere, because you already know them. There's nothing special about that one book.[/QUOTE] Before the Bible, I argued in black and white, and got angry at people over very little. I always made grand sweeping statements and just polarized the room instead of trying to solve anything. Reading a book that was written around 600BC (meaning the oldest stories) and that is inspired by who-knows-how-old oral tales and seeing that it agrees with you on most things is extremely profound. I admit that I did not get my morals from the Bible, but I understood them better from the Bible, and understood that nothing is black and white. The Bible is very very gray. What makes the book so special to me is how it is a cultural chronicle of the Hebrews, who were miles ahead of everyone around them in terms of morality and progressiveness, but were constantly shat on throughout history. The Bible is the story of how a small minority managed to stay together and stay strong after being oppressed by Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persian, Greece, and then Rome. Most other religions and cultures and people did not last that long without being integrated into a greater political entity or culture. The fact that it is a chronicle of the people who created a religion and culture that would lead to modern Western Civilization based on its principles is why it should be taken seriously, and is why it is not just another book. If I had not studied the Bible, I would have agreed with you. If I had not understood the essence of the Bible, I would have agreed with you. If I did not learn from what I understood of the Bible, I would be angry at you instead of simply disagreeing by typing out all these walls of text. The Bible is an important book, and should be in all schools, along with all major ancient religious, mythical, and philosophical texts that led to the formation of modern civilization. It would be pompous to say that the Bible is the only important book. I would also include Hindu, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Greek, and Chinese texts to the mix. So these books are important for the moral values of the stories, along with laws that were quite progressive for their time. It is true that many laws in the Bible were taken from older lawcodes, but none of them had as much emphasis on welfare and protecting the weak, etc.

That doesn't answer my question. I've studied the Bible, too. Don't pretend you're the only one here who ever read the book. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] And if you knew the first thing about history, you'd know Judaic law was NOT progressive for its time. In fact, it was a MASSIVE step backward after Greek and Babylonian law. But hey, considering you've clearly only read the [I]one[/I] book, you're certainly not talking in generalized platitudes at ALL.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36106803]It's a poorly written piece of literary garbage[/QUOTE] Why, it's a pretty good collection of rhetorical devices and stuff. Since it's so old wouldn't it be one of the more influential works for developing the English language?

How is it a step backwards? I'd honestly like to know. And I am pretty sure the most lenient of Greek law systems came after Deuteronomy (which is historically attributed to the reign of king Josiah around 600BC ish). I've read a large part of all the works I listed above, not just the Bible.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36113378]Why, it's a pretty good collection of rhetorical devices and stuff. Since it's so old wouldn't it be one of the more influential works for developing the English language?[/QUOTE] Uhh considering it wasn't written in English, no. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=person11;36113394]How is it a step backwards? I'd honestly like to know. And I am pretty sure the most lenient of Greek law systems came after Deuteronomy (which is historically attributed to the reign of king Josiah around 600BC ish). I've read a large part of all the works I listed above, not just the Bible.[/QUOTE] Homosexuality, open and free sexual conduct, dissent, art and free expression were all extremely prevalent prior to the rise of monotheism. In what pockets of civilization there were at the time, they were very open toward one another. Monotheism gave rise to the culture of shame. And in the Biblical eras, the punishment for shameful behavior was invariably death. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] There was this thing called the Dark Ages. Maybe you heard of it.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36113504]Uhh considering it wasn't written in English, no. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] Homosexuality, open and free sexual conduct, dissent, art and free expression were all extremely prevalent prior to the rise of monotheism. In what pockets of civilization there were at the time, they were very open toward one another. Monotheism gave rise to the culture of shame. And in the Biblical eras, the punishment for shameful behavior was invariably death. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] There was this thing called the Dark Ages. Maybe you heard of it.[/QUOTE] I am talking about the Bible as it was written, not what happened after. The Dark Ages are not relevant. I do not think free expression or homosexuality were permitted in Babylonian society, or most societies of the time for that matter. Homosexuality was linked to bad things because it led to people not making babies, which was the most important role of a couple. The need for an heir was paramount, no matter what religion or culture. Well obviously the Greeks were very different. The forces behind monotheism or early Judaism were not solely responsible for some sort of sudden shift backwards to hating homosexuals. As for artistic impression, most organized political entities did not like any expression that did not shower affection on the leader, priest or king. Granted, small villages did not have any problems with self expression, but urban centers, where regional rulers had plenty of power and authority, were susceptible to kingly propaganda and suppression.

[QUOTE=person11;36113676]I am talking about the Bible as it was written, not what happened after. The Dark Ages are not relevant..[/QUOTE] The Bible as it was written was a polytheistic pagan book. Judaism did not exist during the time you are referring to. Nor did the same book you claim to have read. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=person11;36113676]I do not think free expression or homosexuality were permitted in Babylonian society, or most societies of the time for that matter.[/QUOTE] Haha yeah okay I'm glad to know what you [I]think[/I] happened with absolutely no knowledge of the subject. [editline]28th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=person11;36113676]As for artistic impression, most organized political entities did not like any expression that did not shower affection on the leader, priest or king. Granted, small villages did not have any problems with self expression, but urban centers, where regional rulers had plenty of power and authority, were susceptible to kingly propaganda and suppression.[/QUOTE] But they didn't kill people for doing "shameful" things.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36113504]Uhh considering it wasn't written in English, no.[/QUOTE] The King James bible was? This is what we're talking about right? Because that's what the article is talking about. Studying the King James Bible. From what I can tell it's just a big old manual of rhetoric and persuasion in general.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36114343]The King James bible was? This is what we're talking about right? Because that's what the article is talking about. Studying the King James Bible. From what I can tell it's just a big old manual of rhetoric and persuasion in general.[/QUOTE] The bible was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek IIRC. Everything else is a translation, which could vary in accuracy.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36114343]The King James bible was? This is what we're talking about right? Because that's what the article is talking about. Studying the King James Bible. From what I can tell it's just a big old manual of rhetoric and persuasion in general.[/QUOTE] 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=yawmwen;36114382]The bible was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek IIRC. Everything else is a translation, which could vary in accuracy.[/QUOTE] If anything, the King James Bible could be seen as an achievement for mass media, as it was definitely one of the first books produced in large numbers to a standard.

[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] 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

This is an entertaining thread. I'm glad that I've read it.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36112064]Buddy I took religion into consideration for the first ten years of my life, and I've since fully read the holy texts of Christianity, Judaism, and studied the texts of a plethora of other religions trying to figure out which one I believe. I came to the conclusion that they are all lies. I am confrontational toward religion because religion is a crock of shit.[/QUOTE] I think saying this is considerably... fair. :v: [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] Probably because so many people just can't do that and take it too literally.

I agree with Lankist

[QUOTE=Motherfuckers;36118857]I agree with Lankist[/QUOTE] Since when was being illogically biased something to boast about?

[QUOTE=RobbL;36119011]Since when was being illogically biased something to boast about?[/QUOTE] Since when was ignoring the logic and simply using the 'biased' buzzword a legitimate arguing tactic?

Since when was going completely off topic a legitimate arguing tactic? I'm just saying disregarding everything about the Bible is dumb, even if you're an extreme atheist or something

[QUOTE=RobbL;36119011]Since when was being illogically biased something to boast about?[/QUOTE] Everyone is biased, that doesn't change the fact that he is bringing up good points. [editline]29th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=RobbL;36119061]Since when was going completely off topic a legitimate arguing tactic? I'm just saying disregarding everything about the Bible is dumb, even if you're an extreme atheist or something[/QUOTE] Is an extreme atheist an atheist who skateboards and drinks capri sun?