A Former Atheist

[Alex K]

Let me grab a piece of paper, one sec...

[Rhondazvous]

I find that people who don't believe the Bible know a lot more about it and about Christian history than those who do believe it.

I would refine your statement by dividing the believers into two groups: the "thinking" and the "ignorant." You can see the handiwork of the "ignorant" on Conservapedia. For a glimpse at how the "thinking" view things, see The New Oxford Annotated Bible, Augmented 3rd ed., Oxford U. Press, 2007. While mostly Christians, the editors don't have to buy a literal Moses authorship of the Pentateuch and they well realize that Joshua and his motionless sun & mood are a legend. They provide notes on the structure and redaction of biblical texts, and how the texts fit in with the Hebrew culture as far as this can be known.

The problem is that one you take all the supernatural stuff out of the Bible and read it as anything other than literal, you reduce it to a provincial document about ancient Jews that has not the slightest thing to do with me.

[Jericho]

Hell, even the Bible itself is historically inaccurate, and that is without all that suprenatural nonsense added in.

[dahrling]

If you take away all historical inaccuracies and supernatural events from the Bible, you're basically left with a bunch of nonsensical, and many times, hateful teachings and laws.

[Jericho]

And if you take away those hateful teachings and laws, you're left with a leather book cover with the words: "Holy Bible" written on the front. Any theists here get the point yet?

[abaris]

If you take away all historical inaccuracies and supernatural events from the Bible, you're basically left with a bunch of nonsensical, and many times, hateful teachings and laws.

Yes, a mirror of the time and the society they were created for. It's mildly interesting from a historical point of view, it's utterly appaling that a lot of people still try to follow that kind of desert dwelling Iron Age legislation to the letter.

[Jericho]

If you take away all historical inaccuracies and supernatural events from the Bible, you're basically left with a bunch of nonsensical, and many times, hateful teachings and laws.

Yes, a mirror of the time and the society they were created for. It's mildly interesting from a historical point of view, it's utterly appaling that a lot of people still try to follow that kind of desert dwelling Iron Age legislation to the letter.

That sickens me as well. The fact that people disregard that the Bible has literally been the same for the majority of its existence and yet people claim that it is still relevant.

[dahrling]

Yes, a mirror of the time and the society they were created for. It's mildly interesting from a historical point of view, it's utterly appaling that a lot of people still try to follow that kind of desert dwelling Iron Age legislation to the letter.

That sickens me as well.  The fact that people disregard that the Bible has literally been the same for the majority of its existence and yet people claim that it is still relevant.

I hear a lot of people trying to defend the Bible with the argument "it was historically/culturally appropriate for/at the time".

I'm like, okay? But it isn't appropriate now. So why do you still follow it? O_O

[Jericho]

I hear a lot of people trying to defend the Bible with the argument "it was historically/culturally appropriate for/at the time".

I'm like, okay? But it isn't appropriate now. So why do you still follow it? O_O

Which is the exact point that a lot of atheists make when arguing with theists. However, none of them want to hear that or consider that they are wrong. Most of the answers I get in response are:

"Because the lessons are still relevant."
"Because it still teaches us all we need to learn."
"Because I follow God, and the Bible is the Word of God, no matter how old."

It gets annoying after a while.

[robvalue]

Yeah, I wouldn't mind so much if the bible actually was filled with (mainly) good moral lessons. But it's really not.