The 'New' Number One Reason We Know there is No God . . . :D

[Danmark]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_re ... traditions lists a very length assemblage of religions and cultures. I submit it is woefully incomplete. It is a fair assumption that the only ones that made it on the list are one's we have historical references to. This assertion is self defining. We can assume there were/are thousands more we are not aware of.

The question for debate is, "Why is YOUR particular version of "God" correct and the tens of thousands, or millions, of others wrong?

[Divine Insight]

and in the process missing what is best about the Bible, its wisdom and beauty.

I have serious problems with this very idea. People continually speak about the wisdom and beauty in the Bible. But the problem is that we don't see this supposed wisdom and beauty being reflected by any of the cultures who have ever based their philosophies on the Bible.

There is no way that I would point to Israel and the Jews, for example, as a culture that exhibits "Beauty and Wisdom".

I certainly don't see this in Islamic countries, and I don't see it in cultures that have traditionally been based upon Christianity or the Christian Bible.

I'll agree that if everyone actually behaved the way that Jesus preached such a society could potentially be wise and beautiful. But as Mahatma Gandhi pointed out, this is not what we see in practice. Christians rarely, if ever, behave in a way that resembles the principles and moral values that Jesus taught.

So all of these people who keep pointing to the Bible and proclaiming that it contains "Wisdom and Beauty" are losing me, because I just don't see it other than possibly in the teachings of Jesus, but that would be unique to Christianity only. And like I say, typically Christendom hasn't actually reflected the likeness of Jesus anyway. So even if we can point to Jesus as being "Wise or Beautiful" the actual religion of Christianity doesn't seem to possess those traits.

So I just don't see where all this wisdom and beauty exists in the Bible.

Where is it exactly?

Can you actually point to anything specific?

[Danmark]

and in the process missing what is best about the Bible, its wisdom and beauty.

I have serious problems with this very idea. People continually speak about the wisdom and beauty in the Bible. But the problem is that we don't see this supposed wisdom and beauty being reflected by any of the cultures who have ever based their philosophies on the Bible.

There is no way that I would point to Israel and the Jews, for example, as a culture that exhibits "Beauty and Wisdom".

I certainly don't see this in Islamic countries, and I don't see it in cultures that have traditionally been based upon Christianity or the Christian Bible.

I'll agree that if everyone actually behaved the way that Jesus preached such a society could potentially be wise and beautiful. But as Mahatma Gandhi pointed out, this is not what we see in practice. Christians rarely, if ever, behave in a way that resembles the principles and moral values that Jesus taught.

So all of these people who keep pointing to the Bible and proclaiming that it contains "Wisdom and Beauty" are losing me, because I just don't see it other than possibly in the teachings of Jesus, but that would be unique to Christianity only. And like I say, typically Christendom hasn't actually reflected the likeness of Jesus anyway. So even if we can point to Jesus as being "Wise or Beautiful" the actual religion of Christianity doesn't seem to possess those traits.

So I just don't see where all this wisdom and beauty exists in the Bible.

Where is it exactly?

Can you actually point to anything specific?

Easily done. Simply the language of the myths in genesis comes to mind. The Song of Solomon. The Psalms and Proverbs. Even tho' it is not in the Jewish Bible, the 13th chapter of Corinthians and the Beatitudes in Matthew.

Intellectually, the "I AM" statement is as profound as anything in literature.

I have several times commented on the greatness and beauty of the proverb:
"When a man's ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him."

The story in Ruth, ["Ruth 1:16 (ESV) ]
'But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God."'

I could go on and on if sufficiently provoked. Any one who claims to have regard for great English literature and has not read Shakespeare or the King James Version [or one of the translations that try to approximate it, such as the RSV] knows nothing of English literature, much of which is based upon the Jewish Bible and the New Testament.

The Jewish Bible represents one of the richest literary traditions the world has. To dismiss it because some insist on taking it as the literal and absolute 'word of God' is to deny oneself not only beauty and wisdom, but an appreciation of much of the greatest literature [and certainly not just in English] that has ever been penned and relies upon the Bible as integral to that literature.

[Danmark]

Let me add, the entire book of Job. Once one dismisses the fiction that this story should be taken literally, the reader is treated to a tremendous story, perhaps one of the greatest in all of literature. The great questions asked and the tension between Job and God and between Job and his 'comforters,' is at least as good as any dialogue Plato wrote. [Comparisons are odious. ] I do not intend to compare, except to say that Job is a great and profound work of art that is lost to us if we insist on looking at it as a ridiculous, literal story of a prideful and boastful God who is trying to 'one up' another supernatural character, Satan. The story is obviously allegorical and has great meaning and value, once one sees that it should not be taken literally as an actual event.

[Divine Insight]

Can you actually point to anything specific?

Easily done. Simply the language of the myths in genesis comes to mind. The Song of Solomon. The Psalms and Proverbs. Even tho' it is not in the Jewish Bible, the 13th chapter of Corinthians and the Beatitudes in Matthew.

Intellectually, the "I AM" statement is as profound as anything in literature.

I have several times commented on the greatness and beauty of the proverb:
"When a man's ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him."

The story in Ruth, ["Ruth 1:16 (ESV) ]
'But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God."'

I could go on and on if sufficiently provoked. Any one who claims to have regard for great English literature and has not read Shakespeare or the King James Version [or one of the translations that try to approximate it, such as the RSV] knows nothing of English literature, much of which is based upon the Jewish Bible and the New Testament.

The Jewish Bible represents one of the richest literary traditions the world has. To dismiss it because a group of shallow, ignorant, and undereducated dunderheads insist on taking it as the literal and absolute 'word of God' is to deny oneself not only beauty and wisdom, but an appreciation of much of the greatest literature [and certainly not just in English] that has ever been penned and relies upon the Bible as integral to that literature.

But Dan, you seem to be pointing to things that you consider to be "poetically pleasing" or what you consider to be "Intellectually artistic". Those are subjective evaluations based on esthetics.

The problem I have with that is that there are many things that are considered to be poetically artistic or intellectually esthetic whilst not saying anything beautiful.

For example at the of the movie "Gone with the Wind", Rhett Butler says to Scarlett O'Hara, 'Frankly my dear, I don't give damn".

This is considered to be one of the most poetic and artistic lines the history of cinema. And yet it's actually conveying a quite ugly thought.

My question is not "Can we point to artistic poetry in the Bible that can artistically be considered to be quite works of literature?"

Far from it. I'm asking, "Can you point to anything in the Bible that is actually being said that is beautiful or wise in terms of having any actual useful value to us?" (other than just to say, "Oh that was beautifully poetic")

You can say "Thou shalt stone heathens to death and kill their families too", as poetically as you like, that still doesn't make it a beautiful or wise statement.

You point to the Bible having God refer to himself as "I AM" as being "poetically beautiful", but in the meantime you seem to be ignoring the ugly things this "I AM" was up to. Hardening the heart of the Pharaoh and cursing the people of Egypt with all manner of horrible plagues because of the choices their Pharaoh who had his heart hardened was making on their behalf?

To me that kind of "Beauty" is extremely shallow and meaningless.

Show me something in the Bible that is actually wise or beautiful in terms of helping me to live a meaningful life.

For example, show me where the Bible offers me wisdom on how to find a wife in the 21st century. Back in the biblical days marriages were arranged. Women were sold like cattle into marriages. Which also suggests that a rich man had a far better chance of obtaining a desirable wife than a poor man who couldn't afford to purchase a desirable wife.

Where is there any useful wisdom?

I'm not interested in subjective appraisals of what some people might see as being poetically esthetic. I think art is clearly subjective in any case.

Show me some "real wisdom" from the Bible.

How do I handle an unruly child for example? According to the Old Testament I stone the child to death. Is that wise or beautiful?

And I don't see any wisdom concerning this issue in the New Testament either.

In fact, I'm quite sure that the Bible doesn't give any wisdom on potential mental illnesses, etc, because the Bible was written by people who believed that any display of mental illness meant that a person was possessed by a demon.

Is that "Beautiful and Wise"?

It seems to me that when people use the terms "Beautiful and Wise" in reference to the Bible they are using them superficially, in terms of some sort of poetic esthetics or something. Not in terms of actual wisdom.

And to that I think the line of Rhett Butler is actually a quite fitting response to that approach. "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn".

An artistically poetic Bible that contains really bad advice cannot be said to be wise or beautiful IMHO.

That's where I stand on that issue.

Just because something really ugly can be said in an artistically beautiful way that doesn't make it wise and beautiful.

"Stone your unruly Children to death because I AM hath commanded you to do so".

Oh how esthetically beautiful that God was referred to as "I AM".

That is just not impressive.

[Divine Insight]

Let me add, the entire book of Job. Once one dismisses the fiction that this story should be taken literally, the reader is treated to a tremendous story, perhaps one of the greatest in all of literature. The great questions asked and the tension between Job and God and between Job and his 'comforters,' is at least as good as any dialogue Plato wrote. [Comparisons are odious. ] I do not intend to compare, except to say that Job is a great and profound work of art that is lost to us if we insist on looking at it as a ridiculous, literal story of a prideful and boastful God who is trying to 'one up' another supernatural character, Satan. The story is obviously allegorical and has great meaning and value, once one sees that it should not be taken literally as an actual event.

I'm only partly on board with you on this one.

I agree that taken literally it's utterly absurd.

However, IMHO, it's not even a convincing story as a parable.

Precisely how "artistic" a person chooses to label it is indeed a matter of personal subjective esthetics.

I'll grant that the author was creative. And I would also suggest that this was not due to any single author. What is far more likely is that this story was passed done by word-of-mouth and was "refined" over many generations. This explains why it would appear to have been written by a literary genius. Because, in truth, it's a story that was refunded over the ages by many people who specialized in the retelling of stories.

So yes, I would expect it to be somewhat impressive in terms of literary "art".

But where is there any useful wisdom or beauty in it?

What is so "wise" about the story of Job? Other than it seems to be trying to justify keeping faith in this fictitious God?

Many Christians claim that this is a story of why righteous people suffer, but it doesn't answer that question at all.

What "wisdom" are we supposed to get out of Job?

The only "wisdom" I can see this author trying to convey is the idea that it is wise to believe in this God on pure faith simply because this God had created everything that is far beyond the ability of any mortal man to even conceive of.

And IMHO, it even gives BAD EXAMPLES. It has God telling Job that God created fire breathing beasts that no man can tame. Like as if this is supposed to impresses us that "Yes God can do things we can't even undo or deal with".

Like as if this is good enough reason to keep the faith and believe in this imagined God. I don't see where it's basically much different from the arguments that Paul gives when he claims that only a fool would not believe in God because just look around at the world. Someone must have created all of this by design.

In short, Paul is basically giving the Intelligent Design argument (which is basically the same arguing being given in Job as far as I can see)

So does it really matter if these arguments were poetically esthetic (in the eyes of some people), when today we know that such arguments are not wise?

[Danmark]

But Dan, you seem to be pointing to things that you consider to be "poetically pleasing" or what you consider to be "Intellectually artistic". Those are subjective evaluations based on esthetics.

The problem I have with that is that there are many things that are considered to be poetically artistic or intellectually esthetic whilst not saying anything beautiful.

For example at the of the movie "Gone with the Wind", Rhett Butler says to Scarlett O'Hara, 'Frankly my dear, I don't give damn".

That others consider that line or other references to 'art' as beautiful or artistic, I find unpersuasive. Some consider Thomas Kincaid paintings beautiful. I consider his works dreadful dreck. People can disagree on what is beauty. I see no reason to dismiss all of the art and wisdom in the Bible because some of it is tribal and ugly, any more than I would dismiss Hemingway or Faulkner or Shakespeare because they wrote some potboilers.

BTW, I've never been able to sit thru an entire showing of Gone with the Wind. Just too boring. Can you seriously dismiss the beauty in the 23d Psalm just because you reject the justification of tribal genocide as portrayed in the Pentateuch?

[Divine Insight]

Can you seriously dismiss the beauty in the 23d Psalm just because you reject the justification of tribal genocide as portrayed in the Pentateuch?

I don't dismiss the idea that we can find "artistic beauty" within the pages of the Bible. My point is, what does that have to do with debates about religion?

Artistic beauty does not equate to "wisdom".

And I really feel strongly about the point I made about how we are to handle unruly children. That's a legitimate question that any parent might actually have.

So they turn to the Bible and what advice are they given? Well the Bible says that if your children are unruly stone them to death.

It doesn't suggest that we should seek out profession medical or psychiatric help. In fact, the authors of the Bible were completely ignorant concerning the idea that a persons behavior could be related to physical or mental illness in a brain.

So where is the actual "WISDOM" in the Bible?

Pointing to subjective esthetics as being "artistically beautiful" doesn't cut it.

We can do that with anything. I mean that kind of argument doesn't support people using the Bible as a basis for religion any more than it would support using the story of Alice in Wonderland as a basis for religion. Many people would say that there are many artistically beautiful things in that story as well.

Where's the WISDOM?

I reject the Bible, not because I think it's artistically ugly, but simply because I don't see where it contains any genuine wisdom.

[Danmark]

Can you seriously dismiss the beauty in the 23d Psalm just because you reject the justification of tribal genocide as portrayed in the Pentateuch?

I don't dismiss the idea that we can find "artistic beauty" within the pages of the Bible. My point is, what does that have to do with debates about religion?

Artistic beauty does not equate to "wisdom".

And I really feel strongly about the point I made about how we are to handle unruly children. That's a legitimate question that any parent might actually have.

So they turn to the Bible and what advice are they given? Well the Bible says that if your children are unruly stone them to death.

It doesn't suggest that we should seek out profession medical or psychiatric help. In fact, the authors of the Bible were completely ignorant concerning the idea that a persons behavior could be related to physical or mental illness in a brain.

So where is the actual "WISDOM" in the Bible?

Pointing to subjective esthetics as being "artistically beautiful" doesn't cut it.

We can do that with anything. I mean that kind of argument doesn't support people using the Bible as a basis for religion any more than it would support using the story of Alice in Wonderland as a basis for religion. Many people would say that there are many artistically beautiful things in that story as well.

Where's the WISDOM?

I reject the Bible, not because I think it's artistically ugly, but simply because I don't see where it contains any genuine wisdom.

Again I disagree.
What is ugly or unwise about the idea that if our behavior reaches a certain standard, even those who oppose us will respect us?

Where is the ugliness in the idea that we should consider treating others the way we want to be treated?

Where is the ugliness or stupidity in considering that if there is a God, he is beyond defining? What is wrong with the admonition not to steal or lie, or be consumed with jealousy? What is either ugly or unwise about putting love at the top of any list of values?

Despite Paul and the general patriarchal attitude of the Bible, a case can be made that the literature of the Bible carries the seeds for the equality of women and the value of each individual life. Why should we let the extreme fundamentalist right define the meaning and value of the Bible? Why should non theists be in league with the conclusions of fundamentalists, largely borne of ignorance and poor scholarship?

[Divine Insight]

Why should non theists be in league with the conclusions of fundamentalists, largely borne of ignorance and poor scholarship?

Because as unfortunate as it may be the fundamentalists are right in pointing out that the Bible does support their views in terms of what it literally has to say.

I think it's even a very weak argument for the non-fundies to argue against the fundies proclaiming that they don't think the Bible should be taken literally.

As I suggested in my example about dealing with unruly children. The Bible literally says to stone them to death. What does it say non-literally about dealing with unruly children? Nothing. Because non-literal instructions are not included in a piece of literature.

I mean how do you "non-literally" interpret the Bible in any meaningful way?

Especially in terms of trying to convince anyone else that your non-literal interpretations should have any merit?

~~~~~

By the way. It's not like Charles was banned or kicked out. He deleted his account because he is frustrated and upset. If he wants to re-join tomorrow I imagine he could do that without any problems.

So his choice to no longer post is entirely his own doing. And as far as I'm aware he could rejoin at any time with no problems.

[Danmark]

Why should non theists be in league with the conclusions of fundamentalists, largely borne of ignorance and poor scholarship?

Because as unfortunate as it may be the fundamentalists are right in pointing out that the Bible does support their views in terms of what it literally has to say.

I think it's even a very weak argument for the non-fundies to argue against the fundies proclaiming that they don't think the Bible should be taken literally.

As I suggested in my example about dealing with unruly children. The Bible literally says to stone them to death. What does it say non-literally about dealing with unruly children? Nothing. Because non-literal instructions are not included in a piece of literature.

I mean how do you "non-literally" interpret the Bible in any meaningful way?

Especially in terms of trying to convince anyone else that your non-literal

The answer is that it is literature, not history, not factual. You may take The Sun Also Rises literally, but that does not mean anyone pretends the events depicted actually happened.

We have no trouble recognizing that Shakespeare's plays did not really happen. Why assume the stories in the Bible really happened? Literature must have verisimilitude. If the author does an excellent job in that regard, his reader assumes he was depicting real events.

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes is a case in point.

Even in the early days, Doyle received letters from readers who believed Sherlock Holmes was real and wanted to hire him. It is a tribute to Doyle's writing that he could create such a believable hero.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea ... ally-exist

Men wrote this stuff. It is testament to their genius that even today millions of people actually believe the events of the Bible, including the fantastic character 'God' actually exist.