Proof the Bible is Garbage?

[Mythrandir]

Where and how did faith develop? My belief is that early mankind (hunters and gatherers) had a very heavy survival dependencies on nature. It seems to me that early man would place great reverence on these things since it would be so obvious that these dependencies were so critical. That would seem to explain why early man worshiped animals, the sun, mother earth, etc.
At some point I assume that ethical elements become interwoven with faith as a way to support teaching and dissemination of important group survival fundamentals, such as it's not a good thing to get your sister pregnant.

If humans have this kind of our common history of faith, it would seem to indicate that we should better understand the value (and need) of faith in our lives.

The origins of worship and ethics appear to be interwoven indeed, and it is very interesting to study this subject. I think Daniel Dennett argues your point in his latest book 'Breaking the Spell', but I haven't yet read it myself so I am not sure. Please correct me if I misunderstood you, but I think you are implying that since faith has been important in the past, it will be important, even necessary, now. I have some counterarguments, but first I'd like to know whether this is your position.

[Ephemeral]

Yes, that is my position but I would add that there is even more at work. I believe that humans have an innate need to believe (believe being used generically and not specifically to a god).

[Mythrandir]

I agree that there is an innate tendency to believe, as well as that it may have served an important role in the past. But I don't think it is therefore important right now. There are other innate properties humans have which one actually have to suppress and control in order to be considered moral. From a pragmatic angle, what does faith have to offer us? Ethics? Perhaps in the past, but now we perceive 'evil' and 'good' within the religious and the non-religious alike. Truth claims? Since there are so many religions and denominations within it, I think it is fair to say that belief is more often wrong than right. Happiness? Nations with a relative small amount of religious people are on top in the 'happiness' studies. This doesn't argue the opposite, but it does indicate that religion does not play a major role in the overall mental wellbeing of a person. Charity? I concede that point for now.

I think there are some mistakes in my chain of reasoning above. But the point I still want to make is that there is a significant number of people who are succesful, moral and really dislike the bible. For them, faith is not necessary, nor important.

[Ephemeral]

I concur that it is possible to be successful and moral without the benefit of the bible (or other religious context). But where did their morality come from? Is not morality a learned attribute? If so, then we can agree that there are other mechanisms (religious doctrines, handed down from parent to child, legal systems etc.) that can be used communicate and disseminate the moral information. The value of a distribution mechanism/system for morals clearly benefits the greater whole (society). So is it the fact that these mechanisms often can become corrupt or bad things that people should avoid them? If we eschew these commonly accepted forms, what will take their place?

[Mythrandir]

I concur that it is possible to be successful and moral without the benefit of the bible (or other religious context). But where did their morality come from? Is not morality a learned attribute? If so, then we can agree that there are other mechanisms (religious doctrines, handed down from parent to child, legal systems etc.) that can be used communicate and disseminate the moral information. The value of a distribution mechanism/system for morals clearly benefits the greater whole (society). So is it the fact that these mechanisms often can become corrupt or bad things that people should avoid them? If we eschew these commonly accepted forms, what will take their place?

There are enough people around who had absolutely no religious upbringing, and live moral lives. That, in my opinion, indicates that belief is not a necessity to spread the good word of living moral lifes. Even if belief was the origin of it, it would not be necessary anymore today. I find it much more likely that an individuals morality is largely an copy of the standard morality within the individual's environment - regardless of whether religion is in his life or not. It seems that community and parenting are the actual contributors of communicating moral rules.
If religion really is a source 'radiating' the rules of ethics, you would expect more immoral behavior in the less religious areas of the world - which does not seem to be the case.

[Ephemeral]

I agree.
But the delta between a family and a larger group (whether it be a religious group or a set of laws in a community) is an important distinction. I say this because of the difficulty with individualism. I would purport that the smaller the group, the easier it is to deal with individualism.
The rub is that as the world has become 'smaller', morals and ethics has become a larger issue. Is the traditional mutilation of young girls genitalia in parts of Africa a moral issue here in the West? How and where do we draw moral boundaries? Obviously religion crosses national boundaries. Laws generally do not. Do we seek commonality between all the ethically systems and try to define a world-wide moral system?

[Mythrandir]

(We're getting a bit off topic). I think the UN has already defined at least some global ethics such as human rights. I do not have an educated opinion about this though. I prefer thinking about what is and what isn't rather than about what should or shouldn't be - the latter is a much more delicate issue.

[Vestige]

I would just like to say "Lmao."

And also... to insult the basis of the three largest denominations is a little ignorant indeed. The old testiment holds it's own in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. You can't just go around insulting billions of people at a time... well you can, but I don't recommend it, unless you're typing in the safety of your home. It's pretty obvious you'd rather choose this internet forum to debase the religions of the world, and hey... that's your right.

Now now kiddo. Why don't you untab yourself back into the game and kill some enemy ships instead of needlessly showing your blatant ignorance all over the internet? And yes dude... you better watch your back when judgement day comes. I'm sure God knows how to use Google.

=]

[Vestige]

The most popular of the mystery religion is Catholicism which lost the mysteries title completely in the 4th century to avoid harassment from Constantine's men. The only thing Christian about Catholicism are the biblical names they now use.

You do realize Catholicism is the root for all Christianity right? Ever been to a Catholic mass. You're such a bloody git.

[Ephemeral]

I would just like to say "Lmao."

And also... to insult the basis of the three largest denominations is a little ignorant indeed. The old testiment holds it's own in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. You can't just go around insulting billions of people at a time... well you can, but I don't recommend it, unless you're typing in the safety of your home. It's pretty obvious you'd rather choose this internet forum to debase the religions of the world, and hey... that's your right.

Now now kiddo. Why don't you untab yourself back into the game and kill some enemy ships instead of needlessly showing your blatant ignorance all over the internet? And yes dude... you better watch your back when judgement day comes. I'm sure God knows how to use Google.

=]

Firstly, I find the tone of your post to be arrogant and demeaning. “Kiddo”? "You can't go around insulting" is your argument followed by you insulting other people? If God knows how to use Google, we can assume He knows how to read these forums.

I saw no direct insults to God or Christ but I did see questioning and certainly criticism directed towards MANs involvement in the Bible and organized religions. Your position is that man’s involvement in religious doctrines has been absolutely pure and unquestionable? Is it your position that man has not committed every sin imaginable in the name of, and under the cover of, organized religion? Is it acceptable to you to openly discuss whether or not the Devil is sitting in the first pew?
And finally, is it your position that these are not legitimate questions to ask and topics to discuss? Or is it that you feel that the internet is just not the proper forum for these discussions?

[T3l Ca7]

Well, I do not know why such an omnipotent, omniscient & Omnipresent GOD needs to use google to find anything about you.

Any if he/she has not already made you a handsome, rich & intelligent lad, I doubt he/she would favour you on judgement day ... no hard feelings, really.

As for bible, it was the best selling (still is) fairy tale for adults. So no it is not garbage, because everything that sells has a positive monetary value on it.

And damn churchs have made loads of $ with it too :fear:

[Exalt]

Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies of Hand Copies............................................ ..........................

filled with mistakes and changed words

renders the bible totally invalid.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...098752165#9m1s

arnt you the same guy that was trying to prove to everyone that aliens are invading and that they are flying around in cloaked weasels and play subspace and eat our brains for breakfast?

you need to just stop, because your completely rediculous

and if you really want to try to prove an entire religion wrong, no make that multiple religions when you talk about the bible (contains the old testiment as well and even muslims believe jesus existed) then your trying to prove something thats been around since humans first existed wrong, and your an idiot for even trying, but if you really feel the need to do this then at least make a valid point, which you havent

and stop making yourself look like a complete fool by saying the rediculous stuff you put on the forums, then people "might" (a very very very very small "might") listen to you

[MetalHeadz]

For me the 'innate' tendancy to believe is a misfiring of an evolutionary predisposition. Not some mystical transcience or spirits in the human 'soul'.

In the past, in accordance to Darwinian theory and some of my own elaborations of his work, it was beneficial to believe rather than to disbelieve - even in the irrational. AKA, you are more likely to survive if you believe irrationally than if you always think rationally. For example, if you always assume that rustle in the bushes is a lion or that the cliff edge is unstable, even contrary to visual evidence, there's a statistically increased chance of you surviving and thus passing on your genes and behavioural characteristics to future generations.

Moreover, I think this is emphasised in children. A child is predisposed with a socially and biologically evolved tendancy to believe whatever it's told. Hence their vehement belief in the tooth fairy/santa claus. Simililarly this was due to a 'misfiring' of the biological precondition to believe whatever their parents told them. 'Don't go near the fire', 'Don't go near the snake', 'Don't go into the dark' - all things which, had they believed it the first time they were told, would have seriously increased the chances of a child surviving.

Like the tooth fairy and god however, irrational belief can be controlled by conscious and logical thinking.

Don't delude yourselves.

[MetalHeadz]

I would just like to say "Lmao."

And also... to insult the basis of the three largest denominations is a little ignorant indeed. The old testiment holds it's own in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. You can't just go around insulting billions of people at a time... well you can, but I don't recommend it, unless you're typing in the safety of your home. It's pretty obvious you'd rather choose this internet forum to debase the religions of the world, and hey... that's your right.

I also find the tone of your statement a fuckin' joke.

I'll tell anyone religious to their face that I think they're belief is irrational. It's called freedom of speech you fuck nut, not that you'd know much about civil rights - bible bashing douche.

Edit: In the UK - obviously not in Muslim countries (backward fucks).

Lmao, the fact is your stigmatising every religious person as someone who would actually defend their beliefs violently. As if they couldn't handle criticism. This is exactly what I fuckin' hate, the unwarranted respect we have to pay to religious opinions, you're a disgrace to humanity. This is the problem with democracy, no one will ever speak out against a big enough electorate but it's about time we that we had some legislation imposed to make religious criticism widely acceptable - just the same as political criticism or ethical criticism is.

I don't care if I'm arrogant because I'm more intelligent than you and I'm better read than you. AKA, I'm better than you.

[genocidal]

You're not arrogant you're just a moron.