Why Do Atheists Interpret the Bible Hyper-Literally

Great Debates
281

Huh? The entire machinery of the Catholic Church - all of which is based, ultimately, on the opinions of centuries of religious scholars - is “tiny, ignored and largely irrelevant” to observant Catholics? The entire Talmudic tradition - based, once again, on centuries of Rabbinical scholarly tradition - is “tiny, ignored and largely irrelevant” to observant Jews?

You simply don’t know what you are talking about.

Bull. Make these arguments, and anyone who has studied their respective religious traditions will just roll their eyes. It is a commonplace of biblical studies that, say, the four gospels all tell slightly different and partly contradictory stories - not the great and amazing revelation you appear to believe.

They don’t, essentially. Most people in this thread, on your side of the argument, are perfectly willing to admit that. Some go so far as to say that the OP in accusing athiests of using the argument is raising a straw-man - since few actual athiests would use such an obviously flawed technique.

Look, I no more believe in the literal existence of gods than you, but this is just a damnfool way of attacking religion, only possibly applicable in those odd bits of the world where some highly ignorant folks literally believe in the absolute truth of every word of the Bible - and a silly argument even then, useful only because literally believing every word of the Bible is even sillier.

282

Those “odd bits of the world” include the United States, where literal interpretations of the Bible form laws and policy. People who form these arguments are not tilting at windmills.

Remember, we just got done having a President who claimed that his views on foreign policy were literally informed by psychic communication with a supernatural being, and most of the country saw this as normal.

283

We also just had a candidate for a major office (and one who is currently still being touted as a realistic candidate for President in 2012) who believes in the Rapture, is afraid of witches and thinks that people and dinosaurs lived at the same time.

284

I’ve only had time to skim the last 3 pages, after reading the first three, and Curtis doesn’t seem to have come back. So, for Curtis when he returns, or anyone else that is generally ‘taking his side’, would anyone like to present a 'Champion", that is, the person whom you think has the interpretation you agree with and would defend literally, eg ‘they correctly separate the wheat from the chaff regarding allegory/folklore/that which is literal’?

285

I ain’t Curtis, but I kind of suspect his most honest answer would be “Curtis”. Mainly because most theists I’ve met seem to be very confident in their own chaff-separation abilities.

286

Well, that is, of course, the suspicion, but if he’s going to start this thread it seems he ought to be ready and able to educate us as to which interpretation we should be attacking…
Curtis?
Curtis?

287

You’ll need a bullhorn.

288

I was raised Catholic, if that’s what you’re asking. Nowadays I’m more of a Unitarian type. (I do have some traces of Catholicism in me – you know, you can take the girl out of the Catholic church kind of thing. :wink:

[/QUOTE]

So, in other words, the Bible has had an impact on your beliefs…

289

About that Rapture thing - I am asking this of anyone who cares to answer - just WHERE did that nonsensical garbage come from?

290

There’ve been whole threads about this. Searching may yield useful results.

291

Jurassic Park – it’s a mis-perception of the term “raptor”. :stuck_out_tongue:

292

I do remember something about it. Some loony back in the 19th century started a cult of some sort, and “predicted” the date and convinced many equally stupid people of his “prophecy”. The day of doom came and went. SO he drummed up excuses and “predicted” a new date. That was wrong too.

So, it’s nonsense, just like I said.

293

This IS a great discussion. Many great posts.

I’ll take a stab at the OP. I can’t answer why many atheists interpret the bible hyper-literally-- because we’re individuals (“Yes! We are all individuals!”), but I can explain why I do it.

A literal theist will tell me that this book is written by a supreme being and it is a guide book for life. It spells out exactly what the supreme being wants from us. So if it that were true, I’d BETTER be interpreting it hyper literally. :wink:

BUT… we read the whole thing (I did) and if we’re paying attention, we see hundreds and hundreds of obvious contradictions, much like the one you brought up about geocentrism, Curtis.

So now this book for life and how to please a being needs some answers, translations, interpretations. Ask ten priests, you get ten different answers. (???)

The more we read and try to interpret, the validity of this book starts to plummet.

To counteract this, believing people seem to make their own version of their favorite parts, their savior, their god. Now I hear how much Jesus loves animals from one girl recently. So I ask why Jesus transferred demons into 2,000 pigs and sent them over a cliff in a time of famine? Why kill the pigs? Why not kill the demons? A son of a deity should be able to, no?

The reply I get is usually something like, “You can’t question him/his works.”

Well, why the hell not? The answer I just got is a make-it-up-as-you-go-along type of answer and all I can qualify the characters of this book are as imaginary friends.

When I first read the whole bible in eighth grade, I was astounded at all the murder and suffering this god causes to his creations. Biblical numbers tell us that he killed over 2 million, 83 thousand people IN JUST ONE BOOK. (33 million in “real” numbers) His evil counterpart, Satan, whom god also created it appears only killed ten people entirely in the book of Job under god’s direction over a bet! If there was a choice, I’d trust Satan a lot more. Too bad neither of them exist.

Bottom line: If a deity REALLY wrote this, inspired this, directed this, why can’t it be clearer? A decent deity wouldn’t write or inspire a book that requires constant debate over centuries. It would be clear. Period.

294

Is this one of those “gotchyas!” :dubious:
Depends on what you mean by “impact”. I don’t consider myself a Christian anymore.

Now, as far as Jesus goes, I guess you could say I’m “agnostic” on that subject. Was Jesus the son of God? I don’t know. I do believe he had some damned good things to say, which basically boils down to: don’t be an asshole. (Do unto others, let he who is without sin, the parable of the good Samaritan, etc)

Like I said, I can’t totally get away from it entirely, having spent nine years in Catholic school, and then having gone to a Catholic college. But in essence, my belief is simply that there is a god, or something.

(BTW, does anyone ever watch “The Naked Archaelogist” on History International? It’s a pretty cool show and goes into a lot of the history of the Bible and the roots of certain traditions.)

295

The Naked Archaeologist is complete crap. The host of the show is not an archaeologist, but a Canadian filmmaker (the same one who made the Jesus Tomb documentary). He is extremely inaccurate factually and basically tries to argue for Bible historicity where there isn’t any. He is fundamentally dishonest in what he presents and is not remotely credentialed in archaeology or history. He tries to argue for things like Mosaic authorship for the Torah. He is not anybody you want to look for for reliable information.

No offense intended here. He is very intelligent and skilled at what he does. He does not come across as an obvious fraud or crackpot and he knows how to make himself sound plausible. To people who don’t aren’t familar with the material he covers, he can seem persuasive and reasonable, but he is very selective and deceptive in how he does it. Know that what he is presenting is often at complete odds with real scholarship and evidence.

296

And you know this how?

The book itself doesn’t require constant debate over centuries. Many people choose to debate it for the sheer hell of it. For the most part atheists are “preaching to the choir” when they ridicule the Bible for all of its contradictions. Even in America, fundamentalist Christians are out-numbered by mainstream Christians. And mainstream Christians don’t seem to have that much problem in accepting non-literal interpretations.

The funny thing that I’ve seen is that those who do not believe in the literal-meaning of the Bible are targeted by many atheists as “cherry pickers.”

I find many of you atheists to be not quite as logical as you wish to appear. You seem to argue the same points over and over. Most atheists that I’ve known are basically no different from most mainstream Christians. Many Christians, for example, are annoyed by “In God We Trust” being on our currency. Many were and remain opposed to school sponsored prayer. We don’t want tax dollars spent on religious displays.

Do you think that only atheists and agnostics were responsible for these changes?

Religious freedom. We ought to try it sometime. Meanwhile I am horrified by the growing Islamophobia worldwide.

297

Well, they are. And good thing too; nobody except maybe for a few insane maniacs takes the whole of bible serious. But the argument doesn’t end with “y’all just cherry pickin’”. The argument is more or less; given that every Christian follows parts of the bible and completely ignores others, but not every Christian picks the same things, it should be obvious that the bible is not a dependable guide to morality, law, or even belief. So don’t use the bible to argue for in those areas.

298

I knew immediately upon reading this that you are not from the US. While I agree with you about the “insane maniacs” description, you are so far off about the “few” as far as the United States in concerned.

America has extraordinarily large numbers of insane maniacal biblical literalists – 1/3 of our whole population. I wish they could be dismissed as casually as they are everywhere else. but they can’t be. They are noisy and dangerous.

299

If they didn’t demand that the rest of us have to believe and think like they do, if they were not so hell bent on remaking this place into their version of a theocratic “christian nation”, if they didn’t keep trying to rewrite the law according to their own beliefs, people might not be so annoyed at them. They are the ones who are trying to dictate, trying to take control, trying to force everyone to follow their narrow and wrong superstitions and prejudices. They think only their way is right, and all other opinions and religions are wrong. History has plenty of examples, of just how dangerous this is. It isn’t that anyone is denying their freedom, it’s that they want to deny it from anyone who is not exactly like them. Sp they whine and complain that the are being picked on when they are doing the picking. They bitch that “the other guys” won’t shut up, when it’s really them. They scream that the other guy is interpreting wrong and saying things, when really it’s them. So, they are really saying everyone else should shut up, when really it’s them who need to shut up once in a while.

300

Words can scarcely describe the inanity, but you have come closer than most. I salute you.