Book Review: 101 Myths of the Bible

peeplj · Post by **peeplj** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 12:05 pm

I think in our culture it is valuable to have at least some familiarity with the bible.

Notice I didn't say a word about belief, however.

I think it is extremely valuable for non-Christians to have some familiarity with the bible.

By being familiar with the Christian perspective and belief system, you gain the ability to fit in, to vanish into the crowd.

This can be a life-saving ability. Some brands of believers can be particularly aggressive, even dangerous to those who don't share their beliefs and views.

--James

susnfx · Post by **susnfx** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 12:09 pm

peeplj wrote:Some brands of believers can be particularly aggressive, even dangerous to those who don't share their beliefs and views.

True of many ideologies.

BrassBlower · Post by **BrassBlower** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 12:10 pm

glauber wrote: Quick, someone please compare George Bush to Hitler so this thread gets locked!

P.S.: yawn! this thread is over for me.

I think both of them were only married once!

Never mind that the latter and his bride consummated their union in the bunker a la Romeo and Juliet!

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 12:13 pm

Most people nowadays would like to think they are in the Galelio camp, ie, enjoying the discovery of scientific truths and leaving the myths behind, or at least in their proper place. But sadly, I doubt if that is really the case. It's always interesting to watch religion struggle to adjust when science discovers something that puts the scriptures in a questionable light. I think most scientist respect the bible and all other religious scripture. They are just better at sorting out the usefulness of it all and leaving the rest as a demonstration of how far we humans have come in our understanding of the universe.

I've read most all the Joseph Campbell stuff and listened to his lectures re. the usefulness of preserving a myth, and the power in a myth. But, while there may be some advantages to it (the myths), I don't know anyone who thinks Campbell's stuff is very useful in helping humanity forward. And by "forward" I mean making the world a better place because through the practical truths that science has discovered and shared with us. There's no comparison. Although, there may still be some people who believe the moon is made of cheese.

Re. the Deut. 34 verse and it being a weak argument, I see nothing strong about using that as an excuse, esp. in a book as flawless as the bible is suppose to be, to say everything must be okay within. It reminds me of that text in Ezra that says Artexerxes lived and reigned before Darius. There is nobody with any historical education that believes that. There are so many examples of where the bible can't be trusted for literal use that it seems to have become more of an exercise for seperating the gulible from those who like to question authority...namely the likes of true heros Galelio, and the rest of good science.

Most educated biblical scholars recognize that most of the OT was probably put in written form only a few hundred years before the time of Christ, during a time when even the Hebrew language was in danger of becoming extinct.

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 12:30 pm

Oh, one more thing. The humorous notion of locking this thread, just because of some protectionist's effort to try to preserve a myth...wouldn't it be better to unlock a mystery and expose the myth if it truely is one? Any solid truth has to be able to stand up to an examination of it's contents. Even your bible says to be prepared to offer a reason for your faith.

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 12:34 pm

I'm not rejecting the Bible.

Weeks you're right, I didn't read it all. I saw you mentioned Clinton 2000 more times and knew exactly where you were going. He's the root of all evil, we got that already. Time to move on.

Bush and Hitler are comparable in that they're both fascists.

I'm taking glauber's lead on this and forgetting it, it's becoming an argument(s) this board has had 55,000 times already. Not that there's anything wrong with having the same conversation over and over, I just don't want to.

susnfx · Post by **susnfx** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 12:35 pm

Lorenzo wrote:Oh, one more thing. The humorous notion of locking this thread, just because of some protectionist's effort to try to preserve a myth...wouldn't it be better to unlock a mystery and expose the myth if it truely is one? Any solid truth has to be able to stand up to an examination of it's contents. Even your bible says to be prepared to offer a reason for your faith.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that this thread be locked - only a joke made by glauber - certainly not by "some protectionist trying to preserve a myth." I'm baffled as to why it was ever started in the first place, but wouldn't suggest it be locked - yet.

Susan

energy · Post by **energy** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:01 pm

Ridseard wrote:Biblical literalism, when it conflicts with science, is not necessarily benign. In fact, it's scary. It was precisely this issue which got Galileo in some serious trouble.

Alright. Now that the name of Galileo has been invoked how ever many times to "prove" that science and the Bible don't mix...

The Roman Catholic Church of Galileos period was a money making dynasty, extremely defensive of any threats to it's power. Anyone, anyone, who taught anything that undermined the the teachings of the church was viewed as threat. You have to realize that in those days it was taught that the Pope was infallible. Keeping the people believing this was obviously quite important for maintaining them in their gullible state. Therefore, anyone who claimed that the church and therefore the pope had made a mistake was making a claim that very fundamentally undermined the Church's grip on power.

So, my point is that the Church didn't care whether or not the Bible taught an earth centered galaxy, it was simply defending itself from any percieved threats to it's vice grip on power. For a theological instance of this look at Martin Luther.

In fact, there is nothing in the Bible to indicate that the Sun rotates around the earth.

The Weekenders · Post by **The Weekenders** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:22 pm

naw, Dale, I mixed rejecting the major faiths and prevailing culture with the Scripture as part of the attacks. But I do think that sensational debunking adds fuel to the general burning. We are in the midst of having our society de-religionized and it really seems to have picked up the pace lately so the Thread topic and the decision of the poster to create it reminded me of that.. It's probably an interesting book, fer crynoutloud. But it seemed like ad copy in the first post and I asked myself, what is this, a commercial? After all the Just Curious etc etc....

There is a concerted war against religion going on and I don't think the publisher made their choice without cognizance. It "feels" like piling on but may just be making money....

Hey, I don't go to any church so I am not exactly a spokesman for organized religion, especially when I keep meeting VICTIMS of it. But I think the alternative to not having believing people is horrid. Science and secular humanism are not enough to keep us from sliding into a catastrophic existence, despite people's claims that religion is the source of conflict rather than help from it. Never forget the eugenics movement, and that odious 19th century attempt to perfect the human machine, culminating in Hitler. He had to actually add myth back into the mix to sell it though, but not JudeoChristian. What a heady mixture in those Vienna days. Freud, Marx, Nietsche etc.... You have to ask yourself how much good came of all of that brilliance. Well, I do anyway. In the midst of all of that, a book called, I think, "The Bible as History" by Hermann somebody came out , first in German then translated. Just the opposite of the de-bunking but an attempt to historically explain it all.

Of course strong faith can endure the scrutiny and we live in a freedom of speech system so...publish away!

From the front lines of the culture wars,
TW

peteinmn · Post by **peteinmn** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:25 pm

Hello All

I’ve read, with great interest, some of the threads dealing with religion that flare up here from time to time. There are obviously many here who have spent far more time than I studying this subject. However, as someone who realizes that his end is closer than his beginning, I too have an interest in learning the “truth.” While I do not wish to give offense to anyone, I do have a couple of observations and a couple of questions.

It seems to me, that all the issues involved can pretty much be summed up in two fundamental questions. Does God exist? If so, what does he expect of us?

As to the existence of God, as demonstrated by another recent thread on this board, there are excellent arguments on both sides that have gone on for ages. IMHO neither side has irrefutably won this argument after thousands of years of trying.

As to the issue of what God wants from us, there seems to be more than a little ongoing confusion. Judaism has split into three main branches in their interpretation of the Torah. Christianity, based on various interpretations of the books of Moses plus the New Testament, has splintered into many dozens of denominations some of which have historically done great evil to each other. Islam currently has adherents of different views of the Qur'an that seem happy to do violence against each other based on their interpretations of their scriptures. In fact, all major religions seem unable to agree within themselves much less among themselves. Some “New Age” types say, “it’s all good” and assert that all religions espouse the same fundamental “play nice together” philosophy. Problem is, that’s all well and good, until you get to the specifics of what we are to believe and how we should conduct ourselves and then agreement falls apart.

What, IMHO, seems to be the root problem here is a lack of clear, compelling and irrefutable currently relevant information. All the sacred writings of the major religions (as full of wisdom and beauty as they may be) were written in times and places far removed from current circumstances. They offer accounts of gods, creation and moral codes designed for understanding in literally, another age. Are they all right? Are they all wrong? Is only one right and if so, are the majority of persons both living and in past ages doomed simply because they lived in the wrong time/place or because their parents and/or elders didn’t give them the straight scoop?

Most ardent adherents argue that their X, Y or Z scripture is complete and self contained “eternal truth and the will of God” and our failing is simply one of properly understanding and doing what’s instructed in the writing right under our noses. In short, they contend that all the questions have already been answered and if we just shut up and listen to “their” version of things, we will be “saved.” The problem is, we go right back to the issue of many religions and sects all waiving their banners claiming to have “the” correct answer. As with politicians, I remain suspicious of religions and religious leaders that claim to have all the answers.

On the other hand, we often hear the, “God works in mysterious ways” or “in our limited human forms we can never fully comprehend God’s plan” or the “some things we can’t understand but must just accept” schools of thought. Super Duper, I in fact would happily agree that if God exists, we mortals have darn little chance of fully comprehending Him. However, if it is true that God wants all of us to believe certain things and behave in certain ways, this still begs the question of why mankind has never historically had and to this day still doesn’t have clear and concise scriptural guidance that everyone can agree on. Seems to me there’s a contradiction in here somewhere, God wants us to believe and act in certain ways but hasn’t given us clear and convincing enough instructions to stop us from polite argument at best and bloody atrocity at worst.

I humbly request that God hold a press conference of sorts. He could prove his existence not only to hopeful skeptics like me but to all those who were convinced he didn’t exist. This would also be a grand opportunity to get some updated information and ask some questions. While I’m not the most learned in these matters, I would love to moderate the question and answer portion because there are a lot of questions I can think of.

First, for my best friend Paul, who is Jewish but loves my wife’s ham and noodle casserole, I would try to settle that eating pork thing. For others that I know, I would ask God to explain some teeny apparent inconsistencies. For example, in that little spot in Leviticus He uses some pretty strong language about homosexual acts. I would say to Him, “OK God, we understand that once, most people believed that homosexuality was a conscious and willful perversion. However, now most people generally understand that sexual orientation is inborn. So, if You make us in Your image why do You set some of us up to be called abominations and go through all manner of grief in their lives? Is it OK with You that many of these folks grow up to hate and reject You? Oh, and after you explain that, could I ask a few follow-up questions? There are these other teeny little things I would like to know about…… ”

Not trying to be a smart-ass, but having had one-sided conversations with God for many, many years, I have lots more questions than answers. God could clear it all up with a visit and an update. Just a suggestion. Personally, I will continue to argue, plead and shout into the apparent void in hopes of a response. Hopeful Agnostic type here ends his rant.

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:52 pm

Well put, peteinmn. That has been my complaint (and question) from the start..."what's wrong with clarity?" It seems that clearness in the written/spoken word would have helped humanity forward as much, or perhaps more, than all the spiritual stuff. The standard christian response is: that would be arm twisting...god does not force you with clear instruction (but he does in many other places in scripture) so that you are left with a choice. Coming too near the surface would not be good for either party--god or man (so they say).

I don't buy that explanation though.

And so I read the books, both pro and con. And if I see one that looks interesting, I merely suggest it for reading like I did this one (unless one's mind is made up of stone, whoops I mean concrete jim

) I like C.S. Lewis for the other side, among many others and would suggest reading many other pro-religious books as well.

Because of the possibility of the "story" simply being made up, ie, we can neither prove or disprove it because we are so far removed, we are left to test the claims and stories, and myths by cross-referencing it with history, archaeology, and science. Left alone, any religious claim would be too risky taken as gospel on it's own.

Sunnywindo · Post by **Sunnywindo** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 2:11 pm

I personally believe that time will end up being one of the greatest truth provers of all.

Sara

Walden · Post by **Walden** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 2:25 pm

The idea of literalist vs. symbolist is indeed an over-simplification. I will not at this time attempt to speak for others' positions, but will only speak of my own, as a person of the Christian Faith.

The context is much to be considered. I believe that in places where the Bible seems to be speaking literally, that it usually is. I believe that Christ was literally subjected to a most heinously brutal execution upon the cross. The Bible seems to literally mean this, and I take it as such.

On the other hand, people within the Scripture often speak allegorically. The context is always to be taken into consideration. We read:

And all the men of Shechem gathered together, and all the house of Millo, and went, and made Abimelech king, by the plain of the pillar that was in Shechem. And when they told it to Jotham, he went and stood in the top of mount Gerizim, and lifted up his voice, and cried, and said unto them, Hearken unto me, ye men of Shechem, that God may hearken unto you. The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive tree, Reign thou over us. But the olive tree said unto them, Should I leave my fatness, wherewith by me they honour God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees? And the trees said to the fig tree, Come thou, and reign over us. But the fig tree said unto them, Should I forsake my sweetness, and my good fruit, and go to be promoted over the trees? Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou, and reign over us. And the vine said unto them, Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees? Then said all the trees unto the bramble, Come thou, and reign over us. And the bramble said unto the trees, If in truth ye anoint me king over you, then come and put your trust in my shadow: and if not, let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon.

--Judges 9:6-15

In this we find allegory. It is unimportant, in such as this, whether trees actually select a king. Most of us would assume that they do not. But a message is being conveyed. The context tells us that this is allegorical.

We find allegories used by Christ, in His parables of the bridegroom. And He was often in the practice of using allegory, just as allegory is important in modern homiletics.

Much of the history of the Old Testament speaks on more than one level. Especially, as a Christian, I read it as a shadow of the New. In the ram given as the sacrifice in place of Isaac, we see a foreshadowing of Christ, the lamb offered as the sacrifice for us.

When we read of Lucifer, in Isaiah 14, there is first the literal and local meaning of the passage, which refers to the political situation of the time, but, beyond that, we see a deeper reference to the fall of Satan, and, significantly, of the spiritual impact of attitudes of rebellion, arrogance, and pride. All of these levels of interpretation are valid, the literal, the spiritual, the prophetical, and the symbolical.

Dana · Post by **Dana** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 2:45 pm

Can I prove to someone else that God exists? Absolutely not! I choose to believe that God exists, because in reading the words, and examining the life of his son Jesus, I see a person and a reality that is worth believing in. If you're on the outsite looking in, this may seem ridiculous.

I believe that it's a good thing to ask questions. Lorenzo, I hope you keep on searching. Those who seek, find...

Dana

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 2:53 pm

It appears to me that the word "allegory" is being used incorrectly in this thread. Just in case anybody wondered what Bloomfield thinks.