[…flailing arm wildly…]
Ooo! Ooo! Me, please!
'Cause you can’t handle the truth!
No, you idiot. A history book tells an outline of what has happend in america, to get us to this point. In the same vein, the torah states what it claims has happend to the ancient jews, to get us to where where jews became jews, plus how to not violate the laws “god” gave them.
Oooh Oooh can I play this game as well?
How can the founding fathers of our country want ignorance? How can the men (and women) who shed their lives on battlefields up and down the U.S. in the early years of our republic want ignorance?
Is it too much to ask that people get off of their lazy butts and go down to the air conditioned library to read the framing documents (IN TOTO!!!) so crucial to what makes them citizens?
This is a fun game to play!
I’m surprised at the number of people in here who are saying that Catholics don’t read the bible as compared to other groups of Christians. Perhaps the Catholics I knew were different than the average, but I went to 12 years of Catholic schooling in a heavily Catholic community and I know a lot of Catholics who have read the entire bible. In fact, I know more Catholics who have read it than any other group. When I meet Christians or when they try and convert me, I always ask them if they have read the bible.
I have read it from cover to cover many times, myself, and I think all Christians should do that at least once. It’s not that hard, you can phrase it out so you only read a book a night. I think that it is important to read it in order at least once because some stories, especially in the Old Testament, have more meaning when you read them in the order they’ve been placed.
beagledave, if Santorum wants his religion to influence and change the shape of our society and government, then I would expect him to be well educated in his beliefs and the basis for them. To me, it is similar to a politician wishing to amend the Constitution yet he hadn’t read all those works you mentioned.
No you idiot (oops we both just upset poor Eve with the insults) …a history book is NOT the same as reading the primary source material behind the founding of this country.
Look at your own sentence…a history book is an outline, nothing more.
There is a huge difference between an outline…and reading the founding documents in toto (where Eve and others decided to draw the line in the sand).
You guys have a lovely double standard…we can get the gist of what it means to be a “good U.S. citizen” by a passing familiarity with the history of our country…no need to dirty our hands with reading the crucial documents in toto. But you won’t consider someone a good Christian/Jew/Muslim unless they’ve read the entire scripture in toto.
If you don’t mind a personal question, were you born this fucking stupid or did you take private lessons from a microcephalic kid after you choked for six minutes on a circus peanut? Nobody is debating that a knowledge of American history and its most important documents is necessary to be an informed citizen. However, the American Constitution does not damn threaten people with hellfire- the Bible does (for calling a man a fool, in fact). Follow the pheremones back upstream to the topic.
I haven’t said BOO about Santorum except that I think he’s wrong when he seems to imply that Catholics need not pay much attention to scripture…so I’m not sure why your statement is addressed towards me.
But how does that bind Christians? I mean, Billy Graham is a Christian by your sugared porridge definition. He’s read the whole Bible. And he says that all you need to do is accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior. Why should I believe you over Billy Graham?
Are you still talking about Christian belief? Even if you don’t believe in judgement after death, wouldn’t you want to take advantage of the one (as far as I know) description of Christ’s life and work? The guy you worship as divine? I’d think it would be the most interesting words ever put to paper to a Christian. The life and work of an actual real-life supernatural being.
It’s be like me finding a book written by or about a real alien from another planet (or at least believed to be such by me). You couldn’t get me not to read it!
If I were an illiterate Christian, I suppose I’d look into books on tape. And if I couldn’t afford it, I bet there’s plenty of churches willing to help out with tapes and even a tape player. Or volunteers to read to me, maybe. And if not, well then I go without.
Who said he would? But I don’t think that illiteracy is an excuse in and of itself would excuse the person (purely theoretical as I believe about as much in the Christian God as I do in Puff the Magic Dragon)- they can still have it read to them, as can the blind. They can still seek to the best of their efforts an understanding of the Scripture itself. And since the vast vast majority of Christians are neither blind nor illiterate in the literal sense, let’s get back to them.
As usual, you’re outsourcing the primary source research. You rely on the info of others for your financial decisions and for your salvation… do you at least read your own bank statements or do you take it on faith there’s money in your account?
The bible does not condemn me to hell for not reading every single passage…what exactly is your point?
Eve (and others) have drawn a line in the sand about what constitutes a “good Christian/Jew/Muslim”. (Of course that same line in the sand…reading the entire bible in toto is not actually MENTIONED in the bible…but I guess we shouldn’t quibble on details).
Why can’t I apply her logic to citizenship? Her logic isn’t “Oh it’s a good idea to read scripture”…or “you should read scripture to be an informed Christian”…but rather “You can’t be a good Christian unless you’ve read every single word in the bible”.
Her line in the sand is a silly framework. It’s equally silly applied to citizenship.
Sure. Let’s – how about the ones (including myself, I must admit) that can’t read Greek? I’m relying on a translator to have picked the right words to convey the right meaning… is that acceptable, or not?
Sure, I read bank statements; and sure, I do external research. But I rely on the accuracy of a fund’s prospectus, and on the honesty of the auditors. I don’t march down to Bank of America and say, “According to my March 2005 statement, I have $7,542.66 in savings. Show it to me.”
Lib, you asked me awhile ago whether I’d ever agreed with you on a subject (I think). Here it is: I agree with you here. If someone sets up the Official Christian Registry and sets the rules for joining it, then I’ll agree with their rules for joining the Official Christian Registry. I still won’t agree that you’re only a Christian if you follow the rules for that registry.
'Tain’t up to Billy Graham to decide who gets to call themselves a Christian. And if he doesn’t get to do it, I, an atheist, sure as shootin don’t get to do it. In order to call yourself a Christian, I’d ideally like you to fulfill two criteria:
- Believe something that in some way, however remote, has got something to do with agreeing with some aspect of Jesus Christ; and
- Want to call yourself a Christian.
In a pinch, I’ll stick with #2, though.
It helps that I don’t consider “Christian” to be any more of a positive term than, say, “gamer” or “cross-stitch aficionado” or “guitarist” or “Floridian.”
Daniel
Then for one thing, that has fuck-all to do with how the word is used in reality, and also is a real sucker. Isiah talks about a person who will bring all jews to jurusalem, with hasn’t happend yet, and I don’t see how that not happening in the past has to do with any kind of proof.
How do you know unless you read
every…
single…
word?
Are you going to rely solely on other fallible human interpretations, and not check yourself?
If I thought there was even a chance this book had info from The Most Important Source, I’d make sure to read every… single… word. Just in case. I don’t let others interpret freaking software design specs, I read them myself, I’d sure as hell not let others tell me what parts of God’s book are important and which are not without at least looking myself.
(That kinda assumes my workplace gets it’s shit together someday and starts writing software design specs…)
Look, I’m not saying anybodys a hypocrite or anything for not reading the whole thing, I just find it odd that it isn’t done more often. I think if I held Christian beliefs reading the whole thing would be very interesting and compelling. But I also like to read the manual when I get a new cell phone, so maybe I’m weird.
I agree it’s not the most common usage – which is why I said what I said to you.
To refresh your recollection, I said:
(Bolded portion added this time).
So I’m asking you – apart from the disconnect between Christian and Jewish views of ‘Messiah’ – or, as you might put it, given that it has fuck-all to do with how the word ‘Messiah’ is used in reality – is that the only reason you’d laugh in the face of a Jew who claimed to have accepted Jesus?
Or to ask it in a simpler way: if a Jew told you he believed that Jesus was a man, not a divine being, and was the moshiach spoken of in Jeremiah and Isaiah, would you laugh in his face, and, if so, why?
It’s unbelievable that there’s this much antagonism to reading the source of ones moral code.
It’s a madhouse… a MADHOUSE!!!
How exactly can reading the Bible NOT help you understand Christianity better? Are you afraid you won’t be able to justify the God who orders the death of babies, who sends Moses to Egypt and then tries to kill him before he’s down the hillside, who orders the slaughter of entire ethnic groups, etc., with the “just say I gotta pretty baby and I’ll let you into heaven” nonsense?
It seems to me that there’s no antagonism to reading the source of one’s moral code. There is antagonism to suggesting that someone who doesn’t read this source is somehow morally deficient, or not really a member of the club, or something like that.
Why should I care whether someone reads a book that I don’t believe in to support a moral code that I don’t believe in? I just don’t get it.
Daniel
You can’t. Few except scholars can read it except in a translation. There are lost books (Quelle), and not everyone agrees upon what books to include or not.
No Christian scholar or Theologian that I know of thinks that it is critical to read “every…single…word”- few even agree upon what is 'every single word".
You’re simply wrong.
Most Jews haven’t read 'every…single…word" of all their various holy texts either- in fact, since the oral Talmud is considered important by many- they can’t, either. AND- the “Law” is much more critical for Jews than it is for Christians.
Ignorance. Fighting an uphill battle, we are.
I’ll reiterate the first paragraph of Daniel’s post: no antagonism to reading, but antagonism to the idea that it’s a drop-dead requirement that it be read.