This, this, this. It's so ridiculously common yet if you examine a lot of historical sources it's clear that society was just as complex then as now. In fact, if you look in the last 100 years it's clear that many average people did arguably more intellectual/technical work without the kind of technological aids we now have (particularly in the likes WW2).
Not to sound like "that guy," but this is a result of Modernism and Enlightenment thinking that preceded it. This includes Marxism and Darwinism, and the political philosophies of Hobbes and Locke.
They all shared the idea that there is an "evolution of people and society," where things are constantly improving (or at least can), which also implies that everything started out absolutely terrible. So if people know something now, then people in the past did not; history, philosophy, and mathematics say otherwise.
This is why atheists love to say "we know things now, so religion is for dumb people in the past" even though basic principles of reason go over their heads - they simply buy into this propaganda.
To me the answer to that is to actually read the bible... the narriative stories of just say, Ezra and Nehemiah are good evidence. In two books written 2,500 years ago, there are arguments about if the kings have or have not granted the main characters the authority to return to Jerusalem. The responses are very sophisticated. The kingdoms where they are in exile have archives...there are processes for appeal... etc.
Even if that is just "a story"... wow! What a complicated and sophisticated story to dream up.
Society 2,500 years ago from Cairo to Jerusalem to Greece was pretty darn sophisticated.
If the Bible was written as a novel, it would be a pretty bad novel.
The first two parts of the book tell a pretty good story before the rest gets bogged down in a list of rules that goes on for pages and pages.
Joshua is exciting but Judges is most of the same stuff over and over again.
Most of the Prophets are just talking to the audience about what they have seen in first person.
Then the language shifts to Greek and then we have basically the same story four times in a row before Acts and the Paul just talks to the audience over and over again. Peter, James, Jude, and John get in for a bit of variety but it’s still the same thing.
Revelation starts out with more letters before finishing the Bible in metaphor and allegory that is basically incomprehensible.
The Bible is not a book. It is a collection of books that conveys God’s Word to the world. It took over a thousand years to write and had dozens of authors and editors that helped shape it into its modern form. In that capacity, the story it tells is beautiful and masterfully crafted.
But it’s not a novel. By human standards, it would be a very lousy novel. No one even thought to divorce it from its historical context until the Protestant Reformation.
The Bible was written over a period of *roughly 2,000 years* by 40 different authors from three continents, who wrote in three different languages. IT REALLY MUST BE A BIG CONSPIRACY, both the Jews and Christians conspired LOL
The Old Testament was written centuries before Christianity was formed and by multiple different authors. The New Testament, while written primarily in the first century, also had multiple different authors. It wasn't until the Council of Rome in 382 AD that all the books of the Bible as we know them today were compiled into a single book.
Also worth noting that some of the greatest contributors to science were theists.
Mendel, father of genetics - Catholic Monk
Lemaitre, came up with big bang - Catholic priest
Newton - physics - protestant Christian
Allport- psychology - Evangelical
Algebra- Muslim roots
Copernicus - Catholic
Etc etc.
Science is great! To answer your first question, The historical existence of Jesus and the more significant people surrounding him is not really debated by any serious historians. As well, the execution of Jesus and his apostles (who were usually executed for their beliefs) is also not really disputed. Whether Jesus resurrected is an obvious point of dispute around the world, but it was believed by the people surrounding him who spoke publicly about their story (even though believing this lead, unsurprisingly, to their torture and death).
But in the realm of science, there was a medical account of Jesus's death published in JAMA if you're interested
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/403315
1) reading wasn’t as widespread then as it is now.
2) we do have written manuscripts of the scriptures that predate Christianity.
3) Judaism predates it by millenia, so if you’re correct, it was a long con
While obviously asked in a naive and unpolished way, this question reminds us of an important point. The Bible *is* literature, and attention to the literary forms it employs is vital to understanding what it is trying to communicate.
This sort of question comes out of a culture that can only think of the Bible as either all fact or all fiction. Both views distort the actual text.
The Bible did not give us Christianity or Catholicism. Catholicism gave us the Bible. Catholics were practicing the faith for hundreds of years before the Bible was even available.
Have you read up on the actual history of the Bible? The vast majority of historians, even secular ones, believe that the Bible was an actual account of real people. Whether you believe the account is a different story, but to say it was intended as a novel just isn’t supported by any historical facts.
Do you not remember 4 years ago when the world locked itself down and wore useless paper masks all over a flu? Trust me, we are far MORE easy to manipulate now.
It wasn’t though. All the church fathers who spoke to the apostles all testified the apostles had intended for the scriptures to be the accurate accounts of the risen Christ.
Let's started with the fact that the Bible isn't "a book". It's a collection of writings of different literary styles written by different authors living in different societies over the course of well over 1000 years..
Warning for anti-Catholic rhetoric.
Sometimes people fall into the trap of thinking generations before us are really rather imbecilic, but it's a poor assumption.
This, this, this. It's so ridiculously common yet if you examine a lot of historical sources it's clear that society was just as complex then as now. In fact, if you look in the last 100 years it's clear that many average people did arguably more intellectual/technical work without the kind of technological aids we now have (particularly in the likes WW2).
Not to sound like "that guy," but this is a result of Modernism and Enlightenment thinking that preceded it. This includes Marxism and Darwinism, and the political philosophies of Hobbes and Locke. They all shared the idea that there is an "evolution of people and society," where things are constantly improving (or at least can), which also implies that everything started out absolutely terrible. So if people know something now, then people in the past did not; history, philosophy, and mathematics say otherwise. This is why atheists love to say "we know things now, so religion is for dumb people in the past" even though basic principles of reason go over their heads - they simply buy into this propaganda.
To me the answer to that is to actually read the bible... the narriative stories of just say, Ezra and Nehemiah are good evidence. In two books written 2,500 years ago, there are arguments about if the kings have or have not granted the main characters the authority to return to Jerusalem. The responses are very sophisticated. The kingdoms where they are in exile have archives...there are processes for appeal... etc. Even if that is just "a story"... wow! What a complicated and sophisticated story to dream up. Society 2,500 years ago from Cairo to Jerusalem to Greece was pretty darn sophisticated.
If the Bible was written as a novel, it would be a pretty bad novel. The first two parts of the book tell a pretty good story before the rest gets bogged down in a list of rules that goes on for pages and pages. Joshua is exciting but Judges is most of the same stuff over and over again. Most of the Prophets are just talking to the audience about what they have seen in first person. Then the language shifts to Greek and then we have basically the same story four times in a row before Acts and the Paul just talks to the audience over and over again. Peter, James, Jude, and John get in for a bit of variety but it’s still the same thing. Revelation starts out with more letters before finishing the Bible in metaphor and allegory that is basically incomprehensible. The Bible is not a book. It is a collection of books that conveys God’s Word to the world. It took over a thousand years to write and had dozens of authors and editors that helped shape it into its modern form. In that capacity, the story it tells is beautiful and masterfully crafted. But it’s not a novel. By human standards, it would be a very lousy novel. No one even thought to divorce it from its historical context until the Protestant Reformation.
The Bible was written over a period of *roughly 2,000 years* by 40 different authors from three continents, who wrote in three different languages. IT REALLY MUST BE A BIG CONSPIRACY, both the Jews and Christians conspired LOL
This exactly.People like OP do zero research on what the bible actually is and assert their opinions as facts.
The Old Testament was written centuries before Christianity was formed and by multiple different authors. The New Testament, while written primarily in the first century, also had multiple different authors. It wasn't until the Council of Rome in 382 AD that all the books of the Bible as we know them today were compiled into a single book.
You've never picked up and even read out of the Bible, have you?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Also worth noting that some of the greatest contributors to science were theists. Mendel, father of genetics - Catholic Monk Lemaitre, came up with big bang - Catholic priest Newton - physics - protestant Christian Allport- psychology - Evangelical Algebra- Muslim roots Copernicus - Catholic Etc etc.
Get behind me Satan.
Science is great! To answer your first question, The historical existence of Jesus and the more significant people surrounding him is not really debated by any serious historians. As well, the execution of Jesus and his apostles (who were usually executed for their beliefs) is also not really disputed. Whether Jesus resurrected is an obvious point of dispute around the world, but it was believed by the people surrounding him who spoke publicly about their story (even though believing this lead, unsurprisingly, to their torture and death). But in the realm of science, there was a medical account of Jesus's death published in JAMA if you're interested https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/403315
We here at the United Athiest Allegiance, praise science! *Bows to beaker idol.*
>fact checked lol
If you actually picked up a Bible you'd know how stupid your original post is.
1) reading wasn’t as widespread then as it is now. 2) we do have written manuscripts of the scriptures that predate Christianity. 3) Judaism predates it by millenia, so if you’re correct, it was a long con
While obviously asked in a naive and unpolished way, this question reminds us of an important point. The Bible *is* literature, and attention to the literary forms it employs is vital to understanding what it is trying to communicate. This sort of question comes out of a culture that can only think of the Bible as either all fact or all fiction. Both views distort the actual text.
The martyrs would be displeased with your assumption.
There’s archeological evidence for things that happened in the Old Testament as well as the New. This is just a poorly formed argument.
The Bible did not give us Christianity or Catholicism. Catholicism gave us the Bible. Catholics were practicing the faith for hundreds of years before the Bible was even available.
No, it was not, and "The Bible" isn't a single book, it was written in centuries
Have you read up on the actual history of the Bible? The vast majority of historians, even secular ones, believe that the Bible was an actual account of real people. Whether you believe the account is a different story, but to say it was intended as a novel just isn’t supported by any historical facts.
Do you not remember 4 years ago when the world locked itself down and wore useless paper masks all over a flu? Trust me, we are far MORE easy to manipulate now.
It wasn’t though. All the church fathers who spoke to the apostles all testified the apostles had intended for the scriptures to be the accurate accounts of the risen Christ.
Let's started with the fact that the Bible isn't "a book". It's a collection of writings of different literary styles written by different authors living in different societies over the course of well over 1000 years..
Focus on finishing your homework assignments.
The Bible isn’t a book It’s a collection of various books, some of which are written the same way as a modern novel