Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rob117 · 09-29-2006, 10:55 AM

The OT. It's got more and better stories. And the NT has nothing like Jeremiah- essentially an eyewitness account of the internal politics of an Iron Age petty kingdom in its last days, written by the scribe of a subversive religious extremist.

In terms of doctrine, I don't think either of them is acceptable in their entirety; times change, standards change. These books were written by their authors first and foremost for their contemporaries, as all literature is. I don't think it's really appropriate to attack the authors of the books; Leviticus may have repressive laws and barbaric punishment practices, but it's no worse than any other law code from the same period.

jeffevnz · 09-29-2006, 03:53 PM

I voted neither, in the sense of how interesting they are. They both have good and bad parts, but on average, they're equally dumb.

Some of the books about kings and prophets are interesting in that, as rob pointed out, they give a snapshot of the politics in a remote time and place. But then there's Genesis, which reads like Beowulf rewritten as a porno. Same with Exodus.

IMO, the epistles in the NT are a lot like Jeremiah, etc, in that they're a window on early church politics. But then the NT ends just as the OT begins, in an incoherent, mythical rambling.

gnosis92 · 09-29-2006, 06:17 PM

A lot of Evangelical Xians talk about how the Bible is the greatest work of literature the world has ever known. A lot of English lit teachers I've had also speak very respectfully of the Bible as Great Books Literature.

My AP English lit teacher also spoke of Milton, Chaucer, Shakespeare and others in similar glowing terms. I was with Evangelical Geeks who read Josh McDowell and Ravi Zacharias, and we talked about Christian philosophy and being Christian debators. A leftwing philosophy professor I knew spoke of Marx, Simone de Bevouir, and other leftwing thinkers in similar glowing terms.

My skepticism of the former claims has led me to skepticism of the latter. I accidentally clicked OT when I intended to click "neither".

I did take courses in English lit, read TS Elliot and Keats and Yates, and James Joyce, I don't get literature -- none of those authors made any sense to me. Of course, I took an introduction to philosophy course, and I don't see women being the victims that the professor claimed. (The corresponding claim about blacks is much more unclear). I've been mulling posting these conclusions in Media.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffevnz

I voted neither, in the sense of how interesting they are. They both have good and bad parts, but on average, they're equally dumb.

Some of the books about kings and prophets are interesting in that, as rob pointed out, they give a snapshot of the politics in a remote time and place. But then there's Genesis, which reads like Beowulf rewritten as a porno. Same with Exodus.

IMO, the epistles in the NT are a lot like Jeremiah, etc, in that they're a window on early church politics. But then the NT ends just as the OT begins, in an incoherent, mythical rambling.

Anat · 09-29-2006, 08:08 PM

Ah, you guys reading Tanakh as English literature! You don't know what you are missing by not reading it in Hebrew. Even when I deconverted in highschool I always enjoyed Tanakh class - how so much can be said with so little, how the authors knew how to play with language. And layers on top of layers of ideas, the evolution of ideas about justice, society, right and wrong in the world over several centuries.

Also, modern Hebrew poetry won't ammount to much without biblical expressions and allusions.

Apikorus · 09-29-2006, 09:23 PM

Anat, if I weren't already happily married, I think I'd propose to you.

JEST2ASK · 09-30-2006, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnosis92

Typo: Should say Do you prefer the OT or the NT, or neither?

Those who prefer the New Testament over the Old include:
Marcion of Sinope, Thomas Jefferson, Mohandas Gandhi, Albert Einstein, Charles Dickenson, Simone Weil, Emily Dickenson, Hellen Keller.

Those who prefer the Old Testament over the New:
Fredrich Niezsche

You could either state your own personal preference, with an explanation, or state the preference of a well known historical figure preferably with reference.

My self: The OT is a major reason I became an atheist. Considering a lot of atheists here at iidb are ex-Christians who have rejected the Bible due to the genocidal atrocities of the OT, I would hope most Jews would come to the same conclusion, take the red pill, and fall to the Dark Side.

I have the exact opposite opinion: the NT is far superior to the OT.

Anat Ah, you guys reading Tanakh as English literature! You don't know what you are missing .... (or IMO as literal history ) Your view is unnecessarily limited ..... how the (O.T.) authors knew how to play with language. And layers on top of layers of ideas, the evolution of ideas about justice, society, right and wrong in the world over several centuries.

In sheer diversity of thought what in the N.T. can compare to Pslam, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, Ecclestiastes, Job etc ... what N.T figure can compare with the complex fully developed figures of the O.T. ... The genelogies of the O.T are much more interesting and vital to the context of the surrounding material than the cropped tacked on linages of Matthew or Luke ...

The O.T is about humans ( individuals or groups The songs of Moses, Deborah are wonderful looks into oral tradition and folklore, the foundations of deep-rooted prejudices etc etc ) the N.T is all theology an IMO collection of cardboard figures delivering long-winded dry philosophical statements grounded not in reality but in the nebulous spirit world ....

gnosis92 · 09-30-2006, 08:22 AM

I do not wish to unduly influence the voting but given 6 people thus far voted "NT" when they could have voted OT or "neither"

who are these 6 voters and why did they take the distinct minority view?

Joan of Bark · 10-02-2006, 05:54 AM

I voted OT, but both are loosely plotted and need a good editor to tighten them up.

JEST2ASK · 10-02-2006, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gnosis92

My self: The OT is a major reason I became an atheist. Considering a lot of atheists here at iidb are ex-Christians who have rejected the Bible due to the genocidal atrocities of the OT, I would hope most Jews would come to the same conclusion, take the red pill, and fall to the Dark Side.

I have the exact opposite opinion: the NT is far superior to the OT. Reading endless geneologies in Chronicles is boring. And the description of the divine in the world we find in John, or the Son as being the sustainer of all things in Hebrews, strikes me as far superior as anything in the OT. The parables and sermon on the Mount strike me as far superior to the tales of Joshua or David's murder of the enemies of God.

A Zen Buddhist actually liked the statement about the birds, as exemplative of Zen Enlightenment. It is highly doubtful the Zen master would care to hear about God destroying the Amelikites (Ref See Zen Flesh, Zen Bones).

September 30 JEST2ASK The N.T is all theology an IMO collection of cardboard figures delivering long-winded dry philosophical statements grounded not in reality but in the nebulous spirit world ....
:wave:

The Sermon on the mount & the Beattitudes seems largely borrowed (re-worded) O.T. Wisdom sort of a concise version of much of Proverbs etc. Passages like the greatest commandment Mark 12:28-33 seem to only simplify the O.T. core (Duet. 6:5 / Lev 19:18) not add anything new. The focus of "Love" for your neighbor ( & enemy) I might take as meaningful / sincere if not for parts such as The tribulation in Matthew (the pre-quel to Revealtion) the many references to final judgement / retribution ... IMO thinly vieled threats love & obey or else ...

JEST2ASK · 10-02-2006, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

I voted OT, but both are loosely plotted and need a good editor to tighten them up.

Would not you lose some very important hints into the writter's mindset, their intended auidence, the time / culture etc ... e.g Proverbs IMO is for the most part a disjointed collection of folk wisdom ... while the resultant product might be more concise could it maintain it's unique flavor ... and the unitentional humor caused by the random placement of diverse advice...

View Poll Results: Do you prefer the Old Testament or New Testament?
I prefer the Old Testament	19	46.34%
I prefer the New Testament	10	24.39%
I prefer neither.	12	29.27%
Voters: 41. You may not vote on this poll

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

09-29-2006, 10:55 AM	#11
rob117 Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: New York State Posts: 440	The OT. It's got more and better stories. And the NT has nothing like Jeremiah- essentially an eyewitness account of the internal politics of an Iron Age petty kingdom in its last days, written by the scribe of a subversive religious extremist. In terms of doctrine, I don't think either of them is acceptable in their entirety; times change, standards change. These books were written by their authors first and foremost for their contemporaries, as all literature is. I don't think it's really appropriate to attack the authors of the books; Leviticus may have repressive laws and barbaric punishment practices, but it's no worse than any other law code from the same period.

09-29-2006, 03:53 PM	#12
jeffevnz Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Alexandria, VA, USA Posts: 3,370	I voted neither, in the sense of how interesting they are. They both have good and bad parts, but on average, they're equally dumb. Some of the books about kings and prophets are interesting in that, as rob pointed out, they give a snapshot of the politics in a remote time and place. But then there's Genesis, which reads like Beowulf rewritten as a porno. Same with Exodus. IMO, the epistles in the NT are a lot like Jeremiah, etc, in that they're a window on early church politics. But then the NT ends just as the OT begins, in an incoherent, mythical rambling.

09-29-2006, 08:08 PM	#14
Anat Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: home Posts: 3,715	Ah, you guys reading Tanakh as English literature! You don't know what you are missing by not reading it in Hebrew. Even when I deconverted in highschool I always enjoyed Tanakh class - how so much can be said with so little, how the authors knew how to play with language. And layers on top of layers of ideas, the evolution of ideas about justice, society, right and wrong in the world over several centuries. Also, modern Hebrew poetry won't ammount to much without biblical expressions and allusions.

09-29-2006, 09:23 PM	#15
Apikorus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,396	Anat, if I weren't already happily married, I think I'd propose to you.

09-30-2006, 08:22 AM	#17
gnosis92 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: usa Posts: 3,103	I do not wish to unduly influence the voting but given 6 people thus far voted "NT" when they could have voted OT or "neither" who are these 6 voters and why did they take the distinct minority view?

10-02-2006, 05:54 AM	#18
Joan of Bark Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Pua, in northern Thailand Posts: 2,823	I voted OT, but both are loosely plotted and need a good editor to tighten them up.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.