ONE OF THE MOST TELLING stupidities of the college credentialed play-lefty atheist is that they don't know that biblical fundamentalism is a fairly modern PROTESTANT idea which Catholics of any knowledge or discernment don't hold with. Stupy accused me of believing that, quote, "The old and new testaments are clearly accurate historical documents." He's so stupid in such a typically stupid way. They don't even try to be stupid in new and interesting ways. Here are a few things I've said here, leaving out the many quotes from many different authors pointing out that the Bible is not modern history, neither is it science.
-------------------------
I'll give you points two and three of the points he stresses because they are useful to an understanding of why trying to read and understand the Books of the Bible as if they were modern history or science or even a "proof" of something is to boldly go futilely where so many others have gone before.
The Thought Criminal Saturday, February 10, 2018
In the point from the story of Jonah, there is a real chance to see how a superficial, "literal" reading of these books, a reading of them as if they are books of history or science in the way we're taught to read everything in this materialistic-scientistic, industrial-mechanistic culture, we don't begin to understand the texts, why they were written, the reason they were written as they were instead of as a modern historical-scientific discourse instead of a book to assert these radical claims about the radically good character of the GOD they were teaching.
Monday, January 15, 2018
The Bible is not a pure urtext edition showing exactly what God dictated to Moses and a series of other Jewish verbatim shorthand takers, it is a collection containing some very inspired text written by human beings with enormous insights but also with the complete human capacity to get things wrong or to have less than truthful intentions in what they are doing. Some of it, such as the texts establishing the temple, I strongly suspect were inspired by a priest caste looking to enrich themselves, as, perhaps, the later Prophets may have also suspected. And it was not written in a time when the standards of history and science asserted in the 19th and 20th centuries were even known, standards which we, today, often breach instead of observe. As my recent antagonist in this matter did in regard to both science and the history and recent events in science.
Monday, October 28, 2013
By a process of rational deduction, not by appeal to Scripture itself, the Protestant fundamentalist concludes that Scripture is infallible (inerrant) and is the exclusive source of divine revelation.
I say "by a process of rational deduction" because the Bible itself nowhere says that it is infallible or inerrant. One has to deduce the principle of inerrancy rationally from the principle of inspiration.
One also has to determines by process of reasoning, not by appeal to Scripture itself, which books are inspired and which are not, which are canonical (ik.e., part of the official "list") and which are uncanonical.
There is no place in the entire Bible where it tells -us how 'we know. which books belong in the Bible and which do not.
Neither is there any place in the entire Bible where it says that everything written in the Bible is unfailingly accurate, in every historical detail.
Friday, May 8, 2015
Atheists are typically so, so stupid and so predictably stupid.
No comments:
Post a Comment