Does the bible have intrinsic value?

[TheRealJoeFish]

Yeah, I tend to think that any writing from a long time ago (or, maybe, even, I'd go so far as to say any writing ever) has some anthropological value. There is literary value in the work, too, I think it's safe to say. And, as a catalyst for much of art, literature, and human interaction, it has historical value in the present. (It's important to note that this historical value is ex post, not ex ante; what I mean is, if the bible had never been written, then the same amount of art and literature and human interaction would have taken place (some people make ridiculous arguments like "without the bible none of the painters would've ever been inspired"), but given that the bible was in fact the inspiration for a great many such works and events, it has actual value now, if only inasmuch as it is related to things with innate value.)(if that makes any sense)

[Mister Agenda]

It's important to Western literature and to understanding many expressions, like 'beating swords into plowshares'.

[Edwardo Piet]

It has extrinsic value, in other words.

[Minimalist]

Sure.  Short people can sit on it to help them see over the dashboard when driving.

[Edwardo Piet]

Or... wipe their butt with it.

Yes, even if they're a turtle.

It's not very good quality though.

Which was to be expected TBH.

[Ivan Denisovich]

If one like to read about some people delusion and their tribal, bloodthirsty god then it has some value. Otherwise it is best left forgotten.

[Drich]

[...]God is the proof of God[...]

God is the proof of God despite the fact he is completely invisible and intangible and therefore the very opposite of self-evident.

Right...

The proof of Obama being president is Obama as president.

To someone in a lost Amazonian tribe Obama is just as invisible and intangible and therefore completely intangible to the 'reality' they have created for themselves.

How presumptuous is it to assume that your life experience is completely representative of all this universe has to offer? You compared to the rest of the universe are stuck in your own little world/your own isolated tribe, and yet you claim to speak as if you had access to all of it.

The best thing you could say is your methods of collecting and vetting data does not include a way to document God.

[Redbeard The Pink]

God is the proof of God despite the fact he is completely invisible and intangible and therefore the very opposite of self-evident.

Right...

The proof of Obama being president is Obama as president.

To someone in a lost Amazonian tribe Obama is just as invisible and intangible and therefore completely intangible to the 'reality' they have created for themselves.

How presumptuous is it to assume that your life experience is completely representative of all this universe has to offer? You compared to the rest of the universe are stuck in your own little world/your own isolated tribe, and yet you claim to speak as if you had access to all of it.

The best thing you could say is your methods of collecting and vetting data does not include a way to document God.

The difference is that if the Amazons sincerely question Barak Obama's existence, there is a Barak Obama we could potentially physically show them, whereas the question of your God's existence always has to be answered by guys like you pointing at a funny spot on the wall and shouting "EVIDENCE!"

[Edwardo Piet]

God is the proof of God despite the fact he is completely invisible and intangible and therefore the very opposite of self-evident.

Right...

The proof of Obama being president is Obama as president.

To someone in a lost Amazonian tribe Obama is just as invisible and intangible and therefore completely intangible to the 'reality' they have created for themselves.

How presumptuous is it to assume that your life experience is completely representative of all this universe has to offer? You compared to the rest of the universe are stuck in your own little world/your own isolated tribe, and yet you claim to speak as if you had access to all of it.

The best thing you could say is your methods of collecting and vetting data does not include a way to document God.

You just proved my point.

[Angrboda]

The bible has a few virtues, but many, many more faults. And as Esquilax pointed out, those virtues would still be virtues whether or not they were 'god-breathed' or not.

If you believe the bible is good literature, I have to suspect it is you that haven't read the thing. Most of its value as literature comes from the creativity of the translators of the King James version, as well as a hindsight bias from our cultural aesthetics having been strongly influenced by its influence on literature as a whole, largely by virtue of its ubiquity and religious centrality. I rather suspect its literary virtues in the original Greek or Hebrew are largely unknown to any but experts. As a work of pure literature, it is easily outdone by any modern classic of fiction. Moreover, since the bible as we know it was the process of centuries of after the fact selection, including a very late fixing of the Jewish canon, any virtues it has are likely as much due to that selection process as any original virtues. Do you believe their selection and political maneuvering to secure 'their bible' was god-breathed? More often than not, it was breathed into existence at the point of a sword or through political leverage. As an example of wisdom literature it is perhaps worthwhile, but the bulk of it isn't wisdom literature, and again, we have a bias towards it for reasons having nothing to do with its virtues as wisdom literature. And again, even restricting it to wisdom literature, it is easily matched or outclassed by, to my view, the Tao Te Ching, Sun Tzu's Art Of War, the Bhagavad Gita, the poetry of Rumi, and many others. The Eloquent Peasant is far more compelling in its simplicity and given its source. No, the Christian bible is shit, and holding up the opinions of a few people who are either too polite to say so, or are simply wrong, doesn't change that.