Misconceptions about the Bible

[Jehanne]

There is no "correct" interpretation of the Bible, or, any other religious texts from Antiquity.  I looked at your profile and see that you are an atheist; is that true?

Let me check . . . yep, that's what it says. Atheist. In another thread I suggested the possibility that I change that to Irreligious/Agnostic/Atheist but it's all ridiculous, isn't it. Theist, atheist, irreligious, agnostic, blithering idiot, sage of verbosity - I'm all of those things and none of them. Their just labels for the pathologically narrow minded ideologues. Designed to keep you from exploring the real truth by keeping you pigeonholed. 

Of course there is a correct interpretation of the Bible, or any other religious text, or for that matter, Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. If I say Gandalf the Grey is headmaster of Hogwarts school of witchcraft and wizardry and you wanted to refute that you would look to JK Rowling's Harry Potter series. If I said Dumbledore was a wizard of Middle Earth who rode a white steed named Shadowfax, a descendant of Felaróf, you would look to JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. If you want to know what the Bible says, examine the Bible.

No literary scholar or author (including, JK Rowling) would agree with you. While it is true that Hamlet is the leading character of his play's namesake, that is where objectivity ends and subjectivity begins.

As for the Genesis account, virtually all Rabbis and other Christian scholars interpreted that text to mean literal days, at least until the Enlightenment. Try as you may, the exceptions do not prove the rule.

[arewethereyet]

If there was only one way to interpret the Bible there would be no need for the dozens of different denominations...if not hundreds. The whole book is a riddle that is made to fit what people want...and never, ever has everyone wanted the same thing.

[Data]

Bible was written in the dark ages by people who didn't know where the sun went at night. Seriously, today a 9 year old child knows more about cosmology than the writers of the Bible.

The Bible was written from 1513 BCE to c. 98 CE. Take away the GPS of the average modern day 9 year old child and they would be lost. The average 9 year old child in Abraham's day could use the stars to find their way and mark the seasons, plant and harvest. Kind of like Star Wars vs. reality.

The word Greek word Kosmos, as used in the Bible, means adornment, and where we get the English word cosmos, cosmology, and cosmetics.  

When it comes to translations, I wonder why then the dumbest people get to translate Bible since they all have firmament, foundations of Earth, that the stars will fall down, etc.

Well, firmamentum is a Latin mistranslation of the Hebrew word raqia and Greek stereoma, but even the KJV and ASV have a footnote where it appears at that reads "expansion" and "expanse" respectively. Those translations and others are based on the Latin Vulgate. It's mostly a product of the times. The science of the dark ages influenced translation. Terms like foundations of the earth and four corners of the earth are obviously figurative and still used in modern English. Falling stars are used figuratively. Stars themselves are used figuratively throughout the Bible in application of people and spirit beings.

[Data]

Are you sure about all of that? Are you familiar with the Biblical hygienic laws? Is that right? Hygienic? Sometimes I think my spellcheck is dumber than I am. I argue with it sometimes. 

Anyway. The Bible doesn't say slavery or rape are bad? I'm going to have to disagree with all of that, actually, if I may.

You're perfectly entitled to disagree if you want.  It won't make you any less wrong, but it's your choice to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Actually, what I was doing is asking questions. For verification. To see where the disagreement comes from.

[Data]

Did they practice abortion at that time? What does sin literally mean? What about a case in which during a struggle with a man a fetus is aborted as a result? Soul for soul? Life for life?

Perhaps you’ve not read the good book?

Numbers 5:16-23


King James Version




16 And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the Lord:
17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water:
18 And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:
19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:
20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:
21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The Lord make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the Lord doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;
22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.
23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:

Is this supposed to be Biblical support of abortion? It has nothing to do with abortion. The law of jealousy, quoted above, is the proclamation of innocence by the woman accused by her husband of adultery. If she says Amen! Amen! she is proclaiming innocence. If she is guilty she would become barren.

[Data]

No literary scholar or author (including,  JK Rowling) would agree with you.  While it is true that Hamlet is the leading character of his play's namesake, that is where objectivity ends and subjectivity begins.

As for the Genesis account, virtually all Rabbis and other Christian scholars interpreted that text to mean literal days, at least until the Enlightenment.  Try as you may, the exceptions do not prove the rule.

What can I say? That's a really bad argument. In fact, it's a non-argument. An appeal to authority? Do you trust Rabbis and Christian scholars? I sure as hell don't. Anyway, it doesn't matter. If there was an argument by anyone against what I say, they would lose. Rabbi and Hebrew or Christian scholar. Unless, the merit is determined by tradition. What I say goes against tradition. Which has a piss-poor record of accuracy.

[Data]

If there was only one way to interpret the Bible there would be no need for the dozens of different denominations...if not hundreds. 

Well, now, hold on. I didn't say there was only one way to interpret the Bible, I said there are many variations of both right and wrong ways to interpret it. The Bible is fallible, it's the uninspired translation of the inspired word. It isn't meant to be applied to us directly. It's an example for us of the past. 

The whole book is a riddle that is made to fit what people want...and never, ever has everyone wanted the same thing.

 
It isn't a riddle. It's harmonious throughout and the subject is simple. The Bible is about the vindication of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. You can make anything to fit what people want, or fear but that doesn't negate the thing being abused or neglected, it just demonstrates that abuse or neglect.

[arewethereyet]

If there was only one way to interpret the Bible there would be no need for the dozens of different denominations...if not hundreds. 

Well, now, hold on. I didn't say there was only one way to interpret the Bible, I said there are many variations of both right and wrong was to interpret it. The Bible is fallible, it's the uninspired translation of the inspired word. It isn't meant to be applied to us directly. It's an example for us of the past. 

The whole book is a riddle that is made to fit what people want...and never, ever has everyone wanted the same thing.

 
It isn't a riddle. It's harmonious throughout and the subject is simple. The Bible is about the vindication of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. You can make anything to fit what people want, or fear but that doesn't negate the thing being abused or neglected, it just demonstrates that abuse or neglect.

It's fiction.  It's not in any way inspired by some god.

It's written by men and rewritten by men and rewritten again and again.  If there was every any inspiration on some higher level it was lost long ago.

[Data]

It's fiction.  It's not in any way inspired by some god.

It's written by men and rewritten by men and rewritten again and again.  If there was every any inspiration on some higher level it was lost long ago.

It doesn't matter whether or not it's fiction, thus the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings analogy. I'm trying to establish what the Bible says, not whether or not it's fiction. 

And the point about it being rewritten is wrong. If you go back at least a thousand years it has pretty much stayed the same, with remarkably little and insignificant textual errors. That isn't just atheistic propaganda, it's supported by manuscripts we have during that time. 

On the point of inspiration, you are correct. The translations are not inspired, their writing from long ago is allegedly divinely inspired.

[arewethereyet]

So tell me, are you atheist as you state in your profile or are you going for the slow burn?

You seem to argue for the Bible and religion more than against.