Next Idea from Richard >
Re: Whom would you like to interview, and what would you ask?Spreading good ideas with someone you know is one of the simplest things we can do to improve the conversation.
- BUZZ
-
DELICIOUS
- DIGG
-
FACEBOOK
-
LINKEDIN
-
EMAIL
How should the Bible be interpreted?
Related Ideas
-
Does politics shape the evangelical debate on climate change? If you put corporate America first, then you abnegate God's admonition to protect the earth. idea by Richard Cizik in Policy & Politics -
What should we do to reduce our impact on the environment? Although there are individual actions we must take to change the way we live, we cannot change the reality global warming without federal legislation. idea by Richard Cizik in Policy & Politics
-
Why are some Evangelicals skeptical of climate change? Science can be an ally rather than an enemy, yet there are tens of millions of evangelicals who don't see it that way. idea by Richard Cizik in Science & Technology
-
John McCain on NAFTA NAFTA has created millions of jobs, says McCain. -
Thomas Cooley: How Can You Make The Most Of Technological Revolution? The Dean of the NYU Stern School of Business, Thomas Cooley, on how technol
-
Letterman Writer Gives Full Frontal Nudity the OK
-
Geithner Answers Questions on His Financial Plan
-
Eleven Technologies That Will Revolutionize Business
-
Having Sex With Lolita in Tehran
-
How to Be a Smart Adopter
-
Ricky Gervais on Religion
-
Michael Bloomberg Action Plan
-
Ray Kurzweil on Living Well Forever
-
Eight Ways Microblogging Will Transform Your Company
Original content is for Non-commercial use under 
If the Bible is a work of fiction, why do so many scholars consider it to be one of the most accurate historical documents EVER written?
Interesting how a common laborer from a boorish province can have such a huge effect on so many people now and throughout history.
Instead, he questions the argument, made by many Christians (Ann Coulter), that because God has granted man dominion over the earth we are not accountable for its destruction. Personally, as an atheist, I find it encouraging that this ridiculous (and dangerous) argument can be refuted even under the working assumption that the bible is truth.
I think that, at least on the environmental issue, conservatives have hijacked the Christian religion and used it to push their own separate agenda. They have done this by cherry picking biblical phrases and perverting their intended meaning. This needs to stop as it's bad for Christians and non-Christians alike. This video is a step in the right direction.
Why do Bible thumpers take this book so literally? Arguments such as these are just circular and silly.
I agree that the earth needs to be tended to. This is common sense from an instinctual view of self preservation, not some divinely ordained directive. It is pretty simple from self survival.
These thumpers are well intended, and christian faith based inspired organizations have brought a tremendous benefit to this world, but seriously. the arc of this belief structure is on the decline...
Why do Bible thumpers take this book so literally? Arguments such as these are just circular and silly.
I agree that the earth needs to be tended to. This is common sense from an instinctual view of self preservation, not some divinely ordained directive. It is pretty simple from self survival.
These thumpers are well intended, and christian faith based inspired organizations have brought a tremendous benefit to this world, but seriously. the arc of this belief structure is on the decline...
As a student of both history and religion i have to say your waaaaaaaay off mark in claiming that "many scholars consider it to be one of the most accurate historical documents EVER written" that is simply not true. In fact most scholars argue that it filled with historical inaccuracies, poor contextual transaltions, and is total hearsay...NOT ACCURATE HISTORY. even the new testament cant agree with itself...i dont even want to bother with the lit crit problems associated with the old testament right now. The new testament was selected, editied, changed, revised and complied hudreds of years after any of the gospels were supposedly written...absolutly none of its presumabley original scripts exist today.
Have you heard the true tale of the Bedouin named Mohammed Ali?
How about the Nag
The Bible is riddled with contradiction and nonsense. You can try to explain it away but why should you have to do that with the word of God?
It is embarrassing to think how many people believe in such nonsense. Step outside the bubble and see it for what it truly is. Therein lies the path to truth.
In the story, yes, but I wouldn't be so sure about reality
On the other hand, to compare the Bible to lies or fairy tales is just juvenile and just illustrates a great lack of understand. You cannot confuse an ancient historical text like the Bible with the modern people that use it as a political tool. It was never intended to be as such.
Josephus was not even born until after Jesus's "death"
In Josephus's huge 21 volume work, "Antiquities of the Jews", there is one tiny paragraph about Jesus
This paragraph contains phrases that either didn't exist at the time of Josephus or that Josephus, a Jew, would have never used. This has lead even most Christian scholars to agree that the passage was altered later. Many other scholars believe the entire paragraph was a much later edition, especially since it interrupts a logical flow from the paragraph before it to the one after.
Oh, and of the dozens of famous Jewish and Roman historians that wrote many works during and right after the time of Jesus's "life", Josephus's paragraph is the only one about him. Odd for a man that wowed huge crowds with his miracles to have been missed in so many history books
But the rest of the book is a pretty good history book of one family and their lessons of hope can apply to life no matter what period of history.
so its a hope book because there's rarely anything new under the sun.
You respond to my comment, I assume, trying to argue the factual inaccuracies of the bible. However, at no time was I arguing that the Bible was factually accurate. I reread my comment, and I reread yours. However, I fail to see what you are responding to. It seems as though I am receiving some kind of cookie-cutter response you usually give to conservative evangelicals. As I don%u2019t subscribe to such beliefs, you%u2019ll find it hard to argue against me. My qualm with you is your superiority complex. I don%u2019t argue against atheism, but I dislike loud-mouthed anti-theists. This could be an intellectual discussion, but you bring us back to Junior High School.
Truth and justice were good and work of God.
I would vote Ron Paul.
Or someone not in a secret group that tells the truth!!!!
Humans will punish themselves for being too stupid.
-ists. I found not to long ago that if a book is Holy it shouldn't have these aspects, so I changed my religious biews. The Bible is completely misinterpreted on a daily basis, or just on Sunday. Of course, to play Devil's Advocate, let's give it a fair chance. Christianity is the youngest of the five main religions and a great deal of its ideas and views are based on other religions. Not to bash on other religions, but why hasn't the question, "How should the Koran be interpreted?" or, "How should the Torah be interpreted?" I do find Christianity to be the most hypocritical religion and the Bible misinterpreted but if those of us that are nonchristian will listen to others and consider what they say then we also have the ability to consider all sides of an argument.
I can barely comprehend your argument it is so ignorant and convoluted. To address your statements:
1. Atheism and evolution are not necessarily two ideas within the same sphere of ideology. Many religious people understand and accept the theory of evolution because it is a scientifically accepted theory that is corroborated by many pieces of evidence.
2. Evolution has nothing to do with "accident". Its called natural selection and the biological advancement process. I suggest reading up on the Origin of Species or evolution in general before making a sweeping statement that really is a logical fallacy.
Don't take what I'm saying offensively. Most people don't understand evolution or atheism yet feel they are perfectly versed in both subjects while bashing them. Learn about evolution at the very least. We as the human race must understand biology to understand ourselves.
One thing I am certain about is that the personal attacks that almost invariably creep into these commentaries are useless, and do not further either intellectual or spiritual discourse. I understand that religion strikes deeply into the emotions of many people, but to let anger be the driving force behind an argument is to destroy the very basis of this website. In other words, one can be passionate about a point of view without smearing the intellect or character of those who disagree.
I've had some spirited debates about religion, and I've never felt the need to call anybody names over it. I come to this website to expand my mind; isn't that what we all should be doing?
So, some ideas he will find difficult: 1) God is not a power figure, 2) God does not judge and does not punish anyone, ever (why would She?), 3) We are loved unconditionally - that means that there is nothing you can do to get God to love you because She already does, and there is nothing you can do to get God not to love you because she loves you unconditionally.
So, who has the power? We do. We decide to create morality and ethics, or, not. That is part of the gift of being loved unconditionally. You get to decide. And, if you are wrong in some way, then change it. That is where to power actually is... in each of us.
Given that we don't know with any certainty who actually set pen to paper, quill to papyrus or chisel to stone, reading any of the "original autographs" of the bible would be somewhat problematic to say the least.
I've heard a lot about them but its the first time i hear one...
That's amazing...
LOL
The Pythons were right... pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'cause there's bugger all down here on earth.
But we let it divide us and hate others?
We have real issues to deal with: disease, the environment, poverty, and the list goes on. The Bible teaches to help the sick and anyone in need. To love.
We're all in the same boat. It's a shame that we do not act that way.
How nice that you should find that in there.. but how selective. You espouse a mostly humanist viewpoint, so welcome aboard.. but we don't need some stone age manual to work out it's better to be kind and loving than hateful. Those books have been the source of more division and hatred hitorically, than just about any other factor in human development. It's not enough for you to tell me how you find what you do in there, please explain how the same books can be used to justify the evils done in the name of the sky-god contained? You can chant 'God is love' all you like, but the evidence does not support that stance.
I'm all for saving the planet, but this guy isn't giving us the right reasons to do so. He's borderline insane.
Taking Christ out of Christianity:
Avant garde pastor teaches a new Christianity where the-way-you-live is more important than beliefs.
Vosper says there's been virtually a consensus among scholars for the past 30 years that the Bible is not some DIVINE EMANATION; it is not The Authoritative Word of God For All Time.
It is a HUMAN PROJECT filled with contradictions and the conflicting world-views and respective political perspectives of its authors.
And yet, she says, the liberal Christian churches, including her own, won't acknowledge to the congregation that it is a human project, that it's wrong in parts and that -in the 21st century- it's no more useful as a spiritual and religious guide than a number of other books.
She says now that the work of biblical scholars has become publicly accessible, the churches and their clergy are caught living a lie that few people will buy much longer.
Posted By: MICHAEL VALPY
link to:
http://www.bigthink.com/faith-beliefs/9057
Replace every instance of "god" with "Elvis", and you'll see how disgusting he sounds.
Also, global warming is not "destroying the planet". The planet will very much still be here. We are doing nothing harmful to it. It doesn't care. It will keep existing. Our effect of warming is just a pinprick compared to the volcanoes and other natural events.
We have to care about the earth, just like we care about our kitchens and bathrooms, it is our home. You can live with no hot water but you can't live with no water.
Those of you who think we have no impact on the planet, consider the deserts. Tens of thousands of years of ignorant crop cultivation stripped the soil. We have an impact, more now than ever, there are so many of us altering things we don't begin to understand. We'll kill ourselves before the earth goes anyplace, but there have been mass extinctions before -- there were the dinosaurs, and perhaps others we don't even know about.
You look at these old "Fun with Dick and Jane" grade school books and read things like "See Dick run". What does that mean? How do you interpret that?
A grade school child understands exactly what is being said in this sentence. Interpret it any way you please-but in the final analysis, "See Dick run" means "See Dick run". You need no commentary. You need no dictionary. It means what it says, and says what it means.
Now look at Genesis 1:1; "In the beginning God create the heavens and the earth".
What does that mean? Well, what does it say? Do you need a commentary to understand this? Do you need a dictionary? No! It mean what it says and it says what it means. It interprets itself.
Believe it or not, 80 to 90 percent of the Bible interprets itself the very same way in which Genesis 1:1 interprets itself: In the verse, right where its written. What does this mean? It means that when you open the bible and start reading, you have an 80 to 90 percent chance of understanding exactly what is written, where it is written. Not because of a commentary. Not because of a dictionary. Its because, like Dick and Jane, the Bible interprets itself, right where its written.
So how should the Bible be interpreted? By simply letting it interpret itself.
Similarly, why bother believing in god at all? Is there any difference between a believer and a non-believer? Why does the number of believers vary inversely to IQ?