Happy Atheist Forum

Enslavement to power.

Romans 13 Respect for Authority (Royals)

This is how Christianity was used to keep people under the thumb of the Catholic dictatorships that plagued Europe throughout the dark ages.  Unlike our Constitution, the Bible does not say that government can be wrong or malicious, only that you should obey them.  It tells you to trust and obey authority (the Catholic church) without question, because "they are sent from God" to rule over you.  Several times the verses refer to "authorities" almost as being "God" or at least "sent by God".

Sick... sick..


Romans 13
1Everyone must submit to governing authorities... 2 So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. 3 For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. 4 The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. 5 So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience. 6 Pay your taxes, too, for these same reasons... 7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect.

Can we admit these are ideas circulated by men who wanted power, and an easy mechanism of control?  What better form of tax collection than saying "God demands it"?

QuoteWhat better form of tax collection than saying "God demands it"?

It is sort of odd that you hear God-fearing Tea Party people shouting "no more taxes" instead of "give unto Caesar what is Caesar's."

But yes, I agree, he Bible is there to control people. It's funny, I just got done watching The Book of Eli today. Gary Oldman blatantly said he wanted the Bible as a "weapon" to control people.

Quote from: "Sophus"

QuoteWhat better form of tax collection than saying "God demands it"?

It is sort of odd that you hear God-fearing Tea Party people shouting "no more taxes" instead of "give unto Caesar what is Caesar's."

But yes, I agree, he Bible is there to control people. It's funny, I just got done watching The Book of Eli today. Gary Oldman blatantly said he wanted the Bible as a "weapon" to control people.

This post made me think of that movie too, for the same reason. Funny.
On the Tea Party side of things though, I don't find it strange about the view on taxation. In general, conservatives (and certainly Fiscal Conservatives) are all about minimum government intrusion into their wallets. Or minimum government intrusion period, really.

St. Augustine, in his Sermon on Matt 8:8 and 1 Cor 8:10(http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf106.vii.xiv.html (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf106.vii.xiv.html))makes a very clear exposition of this passage (see paragraph 13):

QuoteDo we lift up ourselves unto pride, or tell you to be despisers against the powers ordained? Not so. Do ye again who are sick on this point, touch also that border of the garment? The Apostle himself saith, “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, for there is no power but of God, the powers that be are ordained of God. He then who resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.”

But what if it enjoin what thou oughtest not to do? In this case by all means disregard the power through fear of Power. Consider these several grades of human powers. If the magistrate enjoin anything, must it not be done? Yet if his order be in opposition to the Proconsul, thou dost not surely despise the power, but choosest to obey a greater power. Nor in this case ought the less to be angry, if the greater be preferred.

Again, if the Proconsul himself enjoin anything, and the Emperor another thing, is there any doubt, that disregarding the former, we ought to obey the latter? So then if the Emperor enjoin one thing, and God another, what judge ye? Pay me tribute, submit thyself to my allegiance. Right, but not in an idol’s temple. In an idol’s temple He forbids it. Who forbids it? A greater Power. Pardon me then: thou threatenest a prison, He threateneth hell. Here must thou at once take to thee thy “faith as a shield, whereby thou mayest be able to quench all the fiery darts of the enemy.”

Since Paul was writing during the reign of Nero, we can only disobey the authorities when they command us to disobey God.

The passage does not promote slavery or tyranny any more than it promotes the persecution of the Church. In my opinion, Paul's basic position is that, however evil our rulers may be, God is using them for some purpose, and we should endure them as far as possible.

In Christ,
Achronos

St. Augustine had several ideas that contradicted the Bible's. Does this mean you think that the Bible is not infallible?

Quote from: "Sophus"St. Augustine had several ideas that contradicted the Bible's. Does this mean you think that the Bible is not infallible?

I don't hold to Bible infallibility.

The Bible was written by fallible human beings who were attempting to seek God. Much of what the Bible portrays is man's attempt to find God. For example with the bears eating the children, this story may or may not be based in reality, but the purpose of such a message was probably to protect the image/reputation of a particular prophet at the time, to convey that it is dangerous to mock prophets of God, and probably an attempt to quell a dissention among the people who were mocking prophets at the time. The idea that God sent the bears to eat the children was man's interpretation of what God did (the person who wrote it), not what God actually did, that is the key difference. Again, I don't see much value in this particular story; I am not much of a fan of the OT in general except for perhaps some of the psalms and proverbs.

You might say, well then how can you believe anything in the bible if you 'believe' some is true and some isn't? For me, faith isn't intellectual assent to a creed, or believing that a prescribed set of miracles were historical events. The teachings and truths conveyed in the new testament are very profound and affect me on a deep level. The only way that the life, death, and resurrection of Christ becomes real or 'true' to me is to participate in his life death and resurrection (not literally obviously, but through the life of the church). It is only then that the reality of who Christ was/is becomes effective and transformative in my life. For me, believing in facts has no power by itself. Faith must be 'tried on' or put to use by practical action for it to be of any true value. For me, one of the true benefits of religion is that it draws me to a higher level of compassion for my fellow human being that I have not otherwise thought I was capable of.

To sum up I don't consider the bible to be inerrant or the literal "word of God". Some of it is useful for contemplating the divine, and some of it simply isn't. The only real meaning I draw from the scripture it's use in the context of the liturgy itself.

QuoteSome of it is useful for contemplating the divine, and some of it simply isn't.

Very good, Achronos.
I give you an A.

Cheers.

Fair enough. Just trying to understand where you're coming from.  

I'll say this as well,the Bible is not read by a scholarly way. Sure, there is a scholarly way to read the Bible if you want to study it in a scientific manner. But there's also a spiritual way, as was its true intent, since it's not primarily a history book (although it has some historical elements that can't be ignored) or a science book, but a book of spirituality. So we acknowledge that some mistakes can be made, but its spiritual essence is infallible). We "prayerfully" read the Bible searching for lessons and teachings in our lives, and sometimes passages are taken allegorically for these teachings to be made manifest for us personally as well as strengthening our faith in Christ. There are tough passages no doubt, but I think most of these touch passages people deal with is in the Old Testament. The way Christians read the OT is through the lens of the NT, not alone. The OT at its time is believed to be a time of the veil that covered the true spiritual meaning of the text, which is the NT.

Prayer leads believers to interpret the Bible - or any Holy text for that matter - many different ways. So I don't really see how that can be the source for knowing the "true meaning" of anything.

It's not something you can do alone. One needs guidance. That's the point of a spiritual adviser or priest in your life. This way the whole Church can be of one mind.

In other places, text can be interpreted in different ways without compromising the central faith that unites the Church.

I've read many books that were translated from one language to another. No matter how good the translation, something always gets lost in the translation. It gets worse, if the translated book is a translated interpretation of the book, from people who decide for you what is suitable and what isn't. I've seen that a lot with fairy-tale and other fantasy books where the original texts are mutilated to make them "suitable" for children (like 1001 Arabian nights, the fairy-tales of the brothers Grimm, Gulliver's travels, etc.).

The same I think is true for the Bible. For many centuries, any translation of the Bible in a common language was forbidden by the church. The church didn't want that the masses would read the Bible, that was just too dangerous, because it undermined the authority of the clergymen. Even nowadays, the church doesn't really want you to read the Bible. It wants that you don't question the beliefs and dogma's of the church. Therefore, the people in the church are only exposed to those parts of the Bible, that the church thinks is suitable for them. I believe that most believers don' t believe in the Bible (a recent study showed that Biblical knowledge among believers is very low), but that they believe in what their church tells them to believe.

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpranklol.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F10%2Fbibleflask.jpg&hash=3b9885075cb29c12d859fa0b49e5a6b801d476d4)

Quote from: "Tom62"I've read many books that were translated from one language to another. No matter how good the translation, something always gets lost in the translation. It gets worse, if the translated book is a translated interpretation of the book, from people who decide for you what is suitable and what isn't. I've seen that a lot with fairy-tale and other fantasy books where the original texts are mutilated to make them "suitable" for children (like 1001 Arabian nights, the fairy-tales of the brothers Grimm, Gulliver's travels, etc.).

The same I think is true for the Bible. For many centuries, any translation of the Bible in a common language was forbidden by the church. The church didn't want that the masses would read the Bible, that was just too dangerous, because it undermined the authority of the clergymen. Even nowadays, the church doesn't really want you to read the Bible. It wants that you don't question the beliefs and dogma's of the church. Therefore, the people in the church are only exposed to those parts of the Bible, that the church thinks is suitable for them. I believe that most believers don' t believe in the Bible (a recent study showed that Biblical knowledge among believers is very low), but that they believe in what their church tells them to believe.

I didn't think about that, but it's true. After a while the Bible was no longer the main tool for controlling the flock. It took the Catholics a while to even put it into a living language.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpranklol.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F10%2Fbibleflask.jpg&hash=3b9885075cb29c12d859fa0b49e5a6b801d476d4)

Now, this is something I can use! Nice.
 

The bible is made up of 66 books that span over thousands of years so why do you believe that Romans 13 can truly sum up the what the entire bible means? Are you just making fun of the Bible? If you want to make fun I can see your point (although I don't see the humor in it) but if you are truly trying to make an argument against the Bible I would have to say that your proof is lacking. I do not mean to be rude. I feel like if you are going to try to state what the Bible is about then there should be some personally study given to the subject. If you have personally studied all the books of the Bible and you conclude that it is to enslave others then I would have to say your earlier statement does not get your point across clearly.

Quote from: "gsaint"The bible is made up of 66 books that span over thousands of years

Some bibles have 66 'books'.
The Jewish bible as we know it today was compiled around 200BCE.

The Christian (so called New Testament) was written and complied between 50CE and 300BCE.

The span is 500 years, not thousands.

Thought I'd clear that up for ya.

I tried using a bible as a resting place for a hot saucepan, but it left an ugly residue on the pot.
I tried a bible as a door stop, but it didn't seam weighty enough any time the wind blew.
A light bulb blew and I thought the bible might help, but standing on the bible I still couldn't reach the light.
I tried throwing it at some noisy wildlife, but it just didn't fly, the kookaburras just laughed.
There is that thing where a phone book is used to prevent obvious bruising when beating a prisoner.
I'll need a volunteer before I can test if the bible has maintained efficacy as an interrogation aid.

The book of Genesis was written around 1400 to 1450 BC but and the last book to be written, which is Revelations (or letter), was written in 95 Ad. That would make it span thousands of years for the books to be written. Still the subject matter in the books span over thousands of years. Before those of the Jewish faith wrote down the books in the bible they had a very strict oral tradition.

If you would rather nick pick and tell jokes instead of supporting your original argument then I will seek other things to discuss.

Quote from: "Gawen"

Quote from: "gsaint"The bible is made up of 66 books that span over thousands of years

Some bibles have 66 'books'.
The Jewish bible as we know it today was compiled around 200BCE.

The Christian (so called New Testament) was written and complied between 50CE and 300BCE.

The span is 500 years, not thousands.

Thought I'd clear that up for ya.

Even the christians have two different bibles - the catholic version has 73 books and the protestant version has 66.  

If I recall correctly, the bible was written over at least 3500 years and there is no telling how long various versions of the stories floated around in oral form before that.

Quote from: "gsaint"The bible is made up of 66 books that span over thousands of years so why do you believe that Romans 13 can truly sum up the what the entire bible means? Are you just making fun of the Bible? If you want to make fun I can see your point (although I don't see the humor in it) but if you are truly trying to make an argument against the Bible I would have to say that your proof is lacking. I do not mean to be rude. I feel like if you are going to try to state what the Bible is about then there should be some personally study given to the subject. If you have personally studied all the books of the Bible and you conclude that it is to enslave others then I would have to say your earlier statement does not get your point across clearly.

The bible was probably not expressly written to be used to control the sheep but it most certainly has been widely used for exactly that. Much the same way that the internet wasn't created to propagate porn but to deny that that is what it's mostly used for would be ignorant.

QuoteRomans 13
1Everyone must submit to governing authorities... 2 So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. 3 For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. 4 The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. 5 So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience. 6 Pay your taxes, too, for these same reasons... 7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect.

So I guess this means that all the founding fathers of America are going to hell for rebelling against Britain?  lol

Quote from: "gsaint"The book of Genesis was written around 1400 to 1450 BC but and the last book to be written, which is Revelations (or letter), was written in 95 Ad. That would make it span thousands of years for the books to be written. Still the subject matter in the books span over thousands of years. Before those of the Jewish faith wrote down the books in the bible they had a very strict oral tradition.

If you would rather nick pick and tell jokes instead of supporting your original argument then I will seek other things to discuss.

Codex Sinaiticus: It is the oldest complete (Greek only) manuscript of the New Testament and some books of the Hebrew Bible was made around 350 CE.
Codex London: One of the oldest surviving manuscripts of the Torah was made in the 10th century.
Syriac Pentateuch: The earliest known dated Biblical manuscript. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy in Syriac is the earliest known dated Biblical manuscript. It was written by Deacon John at Amida (modern Diyarbakir in south eastern Turkey) in 463 CE.
The oldest extant pieces of manuscripts of Genesis are twenty-four fragments dating from between 150 BCE and AD 70 CE.

Now, if you can cough up a manuscript written around 1450 BCE, you'd be the most revered man in the world.

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"I tried using a bible as a resting place for a hot saucepan, but it left an ugly residue on the pot.
I tried a bible as a door stop, but it didn't seam weighty enough any time the wind blew.
A light bulb blew and I thought the bible might help, but standing on the bible I still couldn't reach the light.
I tried throwing it at some noisy wildlife, but it just didn't fly, the kookaburras just laughed.
There is that thing where a phone book is used to prevent obvious bruising when beating a prisoner.
I'll need a volunteer before I can test if the bible has maintained efficacy as an interrogation aid.

Does it have to be whole to have a purpose..?

Kindling, paper planes, toilet paper, object-to-be-thrown-at-annoying-door-to-door-evangelists..? Any of those uses it might be good for..?  

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"I tried using a bible as a resting place for a hot saucepan, but it left an ugly residue on the pot.
I tried a bible as a door stop, but it didn't seam weighty enough any time the wind blew.
A light bulb blew and I thought the bible might help, but standing on the bible I still couldn't reach the light.
I tried throwing it at some noisy wildlife, but it just didn't fly, the kookaburras just laughed.
There is that thing where a phone book is used to prevent obvious bruising when beating a prisoner.
I'll need a volunteer before I can test if the bible has maintained efficacy as an interrogation aid.

Does it have to be whole to have a purpose..?

Kindling, paper planes, toilet paper, object-to-be-thrown-at-annoying-door-to-door-evangelists..? Any of those uses it might be good for..?  

Don't forget rolling papers

QuoteCodex Sinaiticus: It is the oldest complete (Greek only) manuscript of the New Testament and some books of the Hebrew Bible was made around 350 CE.
Codex London: One of the oldest surviving manuscripts of the Torah was made in the 10th century.
Syriac Pentateuch: The earliest known dated Biblical manuscript. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy in Syriac is the earliest known dated Biblical manuscript. It was written by Deacon John at Amida (modern Diyarbakir in south eastern Turkey) in 463 CE.
The oldest extant pieces of manuscripts of Genesis are twenty-four fragments dating from between 150 BCE and AD 70 CE.

Now, if you can cough up a manuscript written around 1450 BCE, you'd be the most revered man in the world.


Gawen, I never thought I would be doing this, but im sticking up for the theists here.
All you have done is show us a list of 'extant' texts.  Extant means the oldest surviving version.  For instance, a classical text such as 'The Civil War' by Julius Caesar was originally written in the late 1st Century BCE but the newest surviving (extant) copy is from much later (the middle ages, I believe).  This does not mean that the book was originally written in the middle ages.  
However, we can prove this book was written in the late 1st Century BCE as there is plenty of correlating data, such as cross-cultural références to politics, war, art, literature, architecture and so forth.
Similarly, some books of the bible (ie the book of Job) can be dated at 2000 BCE because of such références.  I would not say that I precisely agree with that because I dont know much about biblical archaeology, but it seems pretty silly to say the bible was not written over thousands of years, with a very, very long period of oral history/myth behind it.
This is a big gripe i have with other atheists - most of the time they seem to think the bible's just this childish little book that was slapped together in a little period of time by blithering idiots.  Thats not true.  And we have to get out of that mindset if were going to help people get out of this gilded cage and help move societies forward.
The bible (I have studied almost every chapter of every book) is a frightening book.  There are threats everywhere not to disobey or disbelieve.  Terrible threats.  Look foryourself if you dont believe me. Old Testament or New.  Its a collection of literary masterpieces, and its exactly the sort of thing which has been used and is still used by various people in various positions of power to keep others in check.  (Of course, it is a great many other things as well, but if you dont believe the bible is used for intimidation and control, just ask anyone who's ever been to a Roman Catholic school, or a fundamentalist Protestant church service).

Sorry if im being a pain in the neck, Gawen.  Just saying.

I don't buy that the Book of Job is 4000 years old, or that much of the Old Testament (other than the first parts of the Book of Genesis) are any older than 2500 - 3000 years old. Religions have always had a bad habit of claiming their holy books and myths are far older than they actually are, as if it gives them some extra credence and authority.

Oh...crap. I had forgotten this thread!!

Sorry. Let me catch up tomorrow.

But before I go, the oldest mms fragment of the Dead Sea Scrolls is Qumran 1Q linen 390 BCE-600 CE. So when someone writes that such and such was written 4000 BCE, one must wonder how they came up with that number. Surely, there must have been writings before 390 BCE, but no one knows when the oldest part of the Bible was written and what it consisted of. Papyrus only began around the third millennium BCE and The Epic of Gilgamesh, on clay tablets somewhere between 2750 and 2500 BCE.

Quote from: "Gawen"But before I go, the oldest mms fragment of the Dead Sea Scrolls is Qumran 1Q linen 390 BCE-600 CE. So when someone writes that such and such was written 4000 BCE, one must wonder how they came up with that number. Surely, there must have been writings before 390 BCE, but no one knows when the oldest part of the Bible was written and what it consisted of. Papyrus only began around the third millennium BCE and The Epic of Gilgamesh, on clay tablets somewhere between 2750 and 2500 BCE.

From what I understand, there are often clues in the language itself.  Regardless, I'm sure most of the stories in the bible were passed around orally for generations before being written down.

Quote from: "Velma"

Quote from: "Gawen"But before I go, the oldest mms fragment of the Dead Sea Scrolls is Qumran 1Q linen 390 BCE-600 CE. So when someone writes that such and such was written 4000 BCE, one must wonder how they came up with that number. Surely, there must have been writings before 390 BCE, but no one knows when the oldest part of the Bible was written and what it consisted of. Papyrus only began around the third millennium BCE and The Epic of Gilgamesh, on clay tablets somewhere between 2750 and 2500 BCE.

From what I understand, there are often clues in the language itself.  Regardless, I'm sure most of the stories in the bible were passed around orally for generations before being written down.

Precisely. But when was Genesis (for example) first written? How much of 'Genesis' was actually written down for the first time and when? When was 'Genesis' first written in its current form? No one knows, but we hear dates bandied about all the time. Surely, the Tanahk was not originally written all at the same time and in its current form.
About all one can say for sure is that pieces of the Hebrew Bible was written before the Babylonian captivity because that's all we have to go on.

Just for giggles, I did a google search on "What is the true purpose of the Bible". Here are some results:
to control mankind
The intended purpose of the Bible is to describe Yahweh and instruct in His laws and worship.
It's a learning experience for everyone, in one way or another.
To be an ingenious piece of propaganda.
God’s Word, the Bible, shows that our true purpose in living should be the doing of his divine will.
To justify otherwise immoral actions and ignorance by allowing someone to say "Well, in the Bible it says.."
to teach people to love and accept each other.
Simple: It is God's revelation to man, of who God is, who and what man is, where it all began, God's plan of salvation for humanity,
The Bible was created in the third century AD to serve as a central doctrine for the Catholic Church.
I think the bible is to help each one of us find the answers we seek.

These 10 answers were taken off just one site. Notice how they all differ. But I think the question in the OP should have been (in two parts)...What is the true purpose of the Hebrew Bible, the misnamed New Testament and why do does it include both? And, why are Bibles different?

The sad part is the answers to THAT question will be just as diverse as the answers above.