Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
27. You didn't really answer the question
Sat Mar 23, 2013, 08:03 AM
Mar 2013

Does the interpretation of the Bible not depend at all on whether it is describing people's real interactions with an actual, physically existing deity? Does it not depend in the least on whether any of what are supposed to be the actual words of god were actually spoken by the being that created the whole universe with a wave of their hand, or whether they were just made up by some human trying to tell a good story?

Of course it does. And even more so when the Bible is being used as a guide to make judgements about morals and acceptable behavior. People would obviously regard the laws and moral dictates in the Bible quite differently than they do if they knew for certain that they only came from the human lawgivers in some Middle Eastern tribe or religious sect from a few thousand years ago, as opposed to the Lord of the Universe. Heck, quite a few people who believe that god really exists and dictated the Bible put his laws above the human-made laws enacted by their own lawmakers in their own time. If they were convinced that god didn't exist, their interpretation of the laws, prohibitions and mandates in the Bible would clearly change.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Don't Blame It on the Bible [View all] cbayer Mar 2013 OP
Whitewashing. n/t Plantaganet Mar 2013 #1
Not sure what you are saying. cbayer Mar 2013 #2
I'm saying that the Bible unequivocally condemns homosexuality. Plantaganet Mar 2013 #3
Seems like you are dismissing some pretty hefty arguments too easily. cbayer Mar 2013 #4
Plagiarism is regrettable - Plantaganet Mar 2013 #7
The only ptoblem with this quote okasha Mar 2013 #8
Using the word "twaddle" twice definitely solidifies your argument. Well done. Plantaganet Mar 2013 #9
Admittedly, it's concise, okasha Mar 2013 #13
Like Shakespeare? Plantaganet Mar 2013 #14
Either interpretation can be supported okasha Mar 2013 #16
You misunderstand. Plantaganet Mar 2013 #20
Allow me to clarify. okasha Mar 2013 #21
I can. Plantaganet Mar 2013 #22
Your original text also states, verbatim, okasha Mar 2013 #23
Try reading the entire post again. A few times. n/t Plantaganet Mar 2013 #24
Already done. okasha Mar 2013 #26
I disagree with your claim Meshuga Mar 2013 #25
That argument only holds skepticscott Mar 2013 #15
Actually, your point is irrelevant okasha Mar 2013 #17
Are you saying that the interpretation of the Bible skepticscott Mar 2013 #18
The article posted in the OP okasha Mar 2013 #19
You didn't really answer the question skepticscott Mar 2013 #27
In textual criticism, okasha Mar 2013 #28
The argument from the article is not to say the bible is a good book Meshuga Mar 2013 #10
Excellent post. You said it so much better than I could. cbayer Mar 2013 #12
I don't see that the argument is being made that the bible is necessarily a good book. cbayer Mar 2013 #11
Pretty interesting. PETRUS Mar 2013 #5
I thought it was interesting as well. cbayer Mar 2013 #6
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Interfaith Group»Don't Blame It on the Bib...»Reply #27