Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (247485)	3/15/2014 8:18:56 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 541965

Just terrific, Sam. Again. It jibes with my own understandings of each though you've clearly taken a few hearty leaps into the details here. The major point to me is that most of the OT used narratives as a way to tell the tribal stories--who they were and why their existence was meaningful. Adult fare? Absolutely. The NT is something of a mixed bag with the greek influence spread throughout. The classic example, of course, is the gospel of John.

To: Sam who wrote (247485)	3/16/2014 12:34:03 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541965

You can, of course, think whatever you want to about the Bible. I do not expect to change your mind, and you will not change mine. As myth- it's open to a lot of interpretations- and I've studied it as literature- and know it a lot better than most of the religious folks I meet. However, as it was "supposed" to be used, as the literal word of God, it's not anywhere near the intellectual level of even bad philosophy. I'll grant you that primitive people, with little to no science, need to have explanations they can deal with, even if they're not true- but at bottom, the Bible is a book, written by a lot of different authors, claiming to represent the word of God, but obviously representing a lot of rather antique and primitive religious thought- much of it recycled from earlier religions, and generally "good ideas" for living (and some really horrible ones). You can give it all the gloss that intellectuals can put it on it- we can put that gloss on fairy tales as well- they too can be seen as "profound" if you put layers of symbolism on them, but in the end, that's not really what it was written for. It's a tool to keep people in line, and part of a group think- and it does that very well, but again, it's purpose is only accidentally, and incidentally, an intellectual one. And I have zero expectations that those who have imaginary friends will want to comprehend any of this. I cannot imagine how believing in things sans evidence changes the mind- but change the mind it must.