Freethought & Rationalism Archive

LP675 · 09-24-2004, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mageth

You seem to forget that the story is a myth.

Yuck, there’s that word again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Anyone who says that it should be read differently, eg as some key for living today, is gratifying him/herself and has no real interest in those who s/he is trying to influence.

If I understood what you said here I think it’s fairly astounding stuff.

LP675 · 09-24-2004, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

I'm sure you've seen your share of Jason films, Final Destination, Wrong Turn, etc., ad nauseum? Films have much more effect on the individual than a book can.

Yep, the problem still comes down to the idiot who peddles the bible as reality for the modern world. These people are the equivalent of child abusers, when they shove it down children's necks. The physically abusing parent usually learns to beat his/her children because their parents did it to them. The religionist usually does it because it happened to them. But then the average religionist knows jack-*hit about the bible. Text is such a slow medium these days. Read the book, son. But, dad, there's an episode The O.C. on tonite. It's time to put off your childish ways. ZZzzzzzzz. Thank god for TV evangelists. Ay-men, brother, pass the tray. You git the drect knowlidge that Jeezus can save yo' soul frm brimstone an' far.

I think the bible is a surrogate, a vicarious enemy. You (generic) can't shoot the real offenders, so you shoot the bible.

spin

LOL! WHOAH!!!!!!!!
This came up while I was posting. I really jumped the gun on that last post.

Does anyone feel that this might be insulting to or hurt the pettle feelings of “religionists�? here? (i.e. should those ‘idiotic child abusers’ among us alert a moderator?)

Toto · 09-24-2004, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LP675

LOL! WHOAH!!!!!!!!
This came up while I was posting. I really jumped the gun on that last post.

Does anyone feel that this might be insulting to or hurt the pettle feelings of “religionists�? here? (i.e. should those ‘idiotic child abusers’ among us alert a moderator?)

Since this was not aimed at you or another poster personally, it is not a violation of the rules. And it was the "idiot who peddles the bible as reality for the modern world" who is the "equivalent of child abusers", not an accusation that religionists are child abusers.

Or were you insulted by this:

Quote:

But then the average religionist knows jack-*hit about the bible.

which is a common observation around here.

spin · 09-24-2004, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LP675

Does anyone feel that this might be insulting to or hurt the pettle feelings of “religionists�? here? (i.e. should those ‘idiotic child abusers’ among us alert a moderator?)

Do I get the idea that you would defend someone who inflicts ancient ideas, often riddled with violence, sexism, racism, illogic, and the certain existence of things that one simply cannot objectively show (ie enforce irreal mental states), on children?

spin

Toto · 09-24-2004, 07:16 PM

OK - let's keep this academic and not get personal.

Toto
mod, BCH

spin · 09-24-2004, 07:19 PM

Let me just clarify something from the original topic:

(Is the old testament of the bible suitable reading for young bible students???)
Given the problems of knowing and understanding the contextualisation of a text, I would have to answer the question, "definitely not." This doesn't detract from the importance of the book, just its suitability for young readers. If the book in question was something written by Nietzsche I'd respond the same way, but then it is unlikely that parents would force their children to read Nietzsche.

spin

Magus55 · 09-24-2004, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justsumner

The Babble is unfit reading for anyone, especially those easily influenced like children.

Whats a Babble? Is that a new board game?

Magus55 · 09-24-2004, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CX

I think there's a difference between offensive and sick and "atrocious" but perhaps not. In any event I wouldn't quibble with such things as you mention. I ultimately think some of the central doctrines of Xianity are immoral and dehumanizing. There's no way around justifying the extermination of every living thing on the planet.

Sure there is. If the whole world was like Hitler, I'd be a strong advocate of destroying it. To God, the whole world was evil and full of sin, unwilling to repent.

Magus55 · 09-24-2004, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crucifiction

Here's my take on the subject:

The Bible was fit for the times it was writen in; many cultures had myths just as violent and cruel. However, I don't believe children of modern times should be exposed to it; because it can harm them. However, it's more the fault of modern society than the writers of the time. Children of the time were actually exposed to real life, they knew about violence and death and bloodshed, unlike modern children who are, for most intents and purposes, sheltered from real life until their early teens, when they have it all thrust upon them {Trust me, I know, I'm sixteen}

So I guess we shouldn't expose kids to anything on Earth since everything can potentially harm them? I recall a thread in the Secular forums talking about introducing youngs kids to pornography, and if I recall correctly, most people had no problem with it. So its fine to expose kids to promiscuous sex and graphic nudity at a young age, but the Bible should be banned? Again, hypocrisy at its finest.

I began studying and reading the Torah when I was very young, and I didn't grow up to be a homicidal maniac. In fact, I grew up to be against the immoral things of life ( lying, cussing, promiscuous sex, war etc.)

Chuck Rightmire · 09-24-2004, 07:41 PM

Do you suppose the flood was a biblical take on the old myth that the gods originally destroyed the first earth they made? I think you can find hints of it in some of the Sumerian mythology.

In response to the original thread, the Xtians never used to expose children to the Bible. As I remember my seventh grade religious history book and the pamphlets brought home by children from sunday school, the texts were pretty well expurgated and with pretty pictures. When I read the Bible through, I was 14 and shocked by Lot's daughters and his sons. i mean, MY GOD, what was this all about?

I now find the begats fun to read knowing that the originals listed in the thousands of years rather than hundreds (the Sumerian and Akkadian king lists have similar ratios).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-24-2004, 07:16 PM	#35
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	OK - let's keep this academic and not get personal. Toto mod, BCH

09-24-2004, 07:19 PM	#36
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Let me just clarify something from the original topic: (Is the old testament of the bible suitable reading for young bible students???) Given the problems of knowing and understanding the contextualisation of a text, I would have to answer the question, "definitely not." This doesn't detract from the importance of the book, just its suitability for young readers. If the book in question was something written by Nietzsche I'd respond the same way, but then it is unlikely that parents would force their children to read Nietzsche. spin

09-24-2004, 07:41 PM	#40
Chuck Rightmire Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Billings, Montana Posts: 451	Do you suppose the flood was a biblical take on the old myth that the gods originally destroyed the first earth they made? I think you can find hints of it in some of the Sumerian mythology. In response to the original thread, the Xtians never used to expose children to the Bible. As I remember my seventh grade religious history book and the pamphlets brought home by children from sunday school, the texts were pretty well expurgated and with pretty pictures. When I read the Bible through, I was 14 and shocked by Lot's daughters and his sons. i mean, MY GOD, what was this all about? I now find the begats fun to read knowing that the originals listed in the thousands of years rather than hundreds (the Sumerian and Akkadian king lists have similar ratios).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.