The Bible: A Good Book "Overall"?

Haruko · Post by **Haruko** » 2005-09-30 11:51pm

I whole-heartedly disagree. The texts are responsible for the promoting of the slaughter of millions. None of its morals such as The Golden Rule are exclusive to it and indeed existed prior. A member on my forum says that if you take out the bad parts, it's a good book. Under that argument, so is Mein Kampf. I pointed out the fault of his cherry-picking.

The debate starts off a few posts down from here: http://pb.exocrew.com/haruko/viewtopic. ... 6919#26919

So far, rebuttals have been posted by me, Saint, and Doctor X.

Am I not the only one who detects someone who just feels insulted having come across criticism of a book he likes?

Haruko · Post by **Haruko** » 2005-09-30 11:51pm

I meant to say "A member on my forum says that if you take out the bad parts, it's a good book overall".

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2005-10-01 12:14am

LOL! "If you take out the bad parts, it is a good book overall". This deserves an FUQ.

Are you arguing on the moral philosophy in question or the literary quality? Not that it makes much of a difference on the stupidity of the above statement...

Haruko · Post by **Haruko** » 2005-10-01 12:19am

He's definetely aruging from a moral philosophy perspective.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2005-10-01 12:34am

Haruko wrote:He's definetely aruging from a moral philosophy perspective.

OK, how's this:

1) Kill all babies born on thursdays. Why thursdays? Just because.
2) You should be nice to the elderly.
3) Heavy metal is banned, punishable by death.
4) Don't kill people.
5) Remember to pay for what you take and use.
6) Give at least 5% of your earnings to charity.
7) Buggery with women within three days of mensturation is wrong.

Contradictory, but then so is the Bible. Anyhow: if you take out the "bad bits" here, it will be "pretty good overall" too. Hell, ANYTHING is "pretty good" if you take out the "bad", what kind of moronic defence is this, anyway? I'm sure that Jack the Ripper would seem a swell guy if you ignored his foibles.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2005-10-01 12:53am

It might be a decent book if you treat it as a fairytale.

Wyrm · Post by **Wyrm** » 2005-10-01 01:16am

aerius wrote:It might be a decent book if you treat it as a fairytale.

Like the original Brothers' Grim?

The Grim Squeaker · Post by **The Grim Squeaker** » 2005-10-01 01:44am

Also some of the later books have a heavy empathise on the importance of charity and helping the community etc...
However it should be treated as a history of the Jewish/Cnanitie people with various rules that were accurate for the time, and that the depictions are done by someone living then (Such as a scribe in David's court etc').
The problem is with people who take every statement as the word of truth/god And prefer the less sympathetic rules and can't recognise the fact that these were supposed to be guidelines that should change with the times.

felineki · Post by **felineki** » 2005-10-01 01:49am

aerius wrote:It might be a decent book if you treat it as a fairytale.

Nah, it's even too incoherent, contradictory, and full of rambling incomprehensible tangents for that. In terms of literary composition, it's on par with "MANOS: The Hands of Fate".

SylasGaunt · Post by **SylasGaunt** » 2005-10-01 02:13am

Damn, someone beat me to the 'and don't forget, it's a shitty read to boot'.

Erik von Nein · Post by **Erik von Nein** » 2005-10-01 02:29am

felineki wrote:
aerius wrote:It might be a decent book if you treat it as a fairytale.
Nah, it's even too incoherent, contradictory, and full of rambling incomprehensible tangents for that. In terms of literary composition, it's on par with "MANOS: The Hands of Fate".

Join the cul... er, Church of MANOS. For each new member free punch and pie is offered!

Lucifer · Post by **Lucifer** » 2005-10-01 02:39am

I heard people say it only works if they tell you to read a specific section in a given context, but it's still the same words back at you. What difference does it make? The ambiguous metaphors sound like excuses.

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2005-10-01 06:27am

It's a good book if and only if you treat large portions of it, especially the old testament, as allegorical stories meant to have a theme or message. To not do so, is to miss the point about entirely about how one should try to live an open, honest, and virtuous life to the best of one's abilities as well harken to the message that Jesus tells us about self sacrifice and divine Grace.

That's why Ibecame a Catholic rather than flock to the more fundamentalist Protestant Organizations. What makes me a Christian should not be soley based on the bible but also on Christian Tradition passed down since the times of St. Paul, St. Peter and Constantine.

mr friendly guy · Post by **mr friendly guy** » 2005-10-01 08:54am

Even as a fairytale, its pretty poor. With entire sections dedicated to genealogies or a list of rules isn't exactly entertaining.

defanatic · Post by **defanatic** » 2005-10-01 07:47pm

And also self-contradictory. When one writes a book, they should not have several parts which say completely different things.

Also, the christian God can be judged, not by what he says (can we trust him, note that it appears to be male), but what he does. Jesus had to shout at God to stop him from destroying something. wtf? Forgiving indeed. My arse.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2005-10-01 10:38pm

Wyrm wrote:
aerius wrote:It might be a decent book if you treat it as a fairytale.
Like the original Brothers' Grim?

Pretty much. Death! Killings! Punishment & revenge! Rar!

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-10-01 10:47pm

The Bible is even worse if you look at it as a fairy tale. Fairy tales don't contain whole chapters devoted to listing family trees and dumb-ass rules, nor are they written out of chronological order. And in a well-written fairy tale, when you kill somebody he generally doesn't come back and attack you again three chapters later.

PS. Fairy tales also generally don't tell the same story four times in a row, each time bringing up new inconsistencies.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2005-10-02 03:10pm

Darth Wong wrote:The Bible is even worse if you look at it as a fairy tale. Fairy tales don't contain whole chapters devoted to listing family trees and dumb-ass rules, nor are they written out of chronological order. And in a well-written fairy tale, when you kill somebody he generally doesn't come back and attack you again three chapters later.

PS. Fairy tales also generally don't tell the same story four times in a row, each time bringing up new inconsistencies.

What's even worse is when you consider those stories being told four or five times in a row are each being told from a different viewpoint, making it even more difficult to tell what's really happening when the inconsistencies start happening.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-10-02 05:21pm

And in a well-written fairy tale, when you kill somebody he generally doesn't come back and attack you again three chapters later.

When did that happen?