Is there room for Christmas anymore?:

Foxfyre wrote:

Letty, I agree that Bible can be taught as literature, and it can also be taught as pure history so long as the theological perspective and point of view contained in the Bible is not perceived as more than theological perspective and point of view. I teach it as both literature and history and as illustration for the theology of a very interesting group of people of ancient times. One cannot understand the content of the Bible, I believe, if one does not consider all three aspects.

The Bible...and the mythology it contains...is easy to rationalize.

From the very beginning, people have rationalized it...and purported that they were viewing it from some wider perspective.

Bring that same perspective to the myths and legends of Greece and Rome...and you can rationalize them also.

0 Replies

There are those who have devoted a lifetime to analysis of Biblical texts and who have drawn conclusions based on reason, logic, and what can be known from archeological, anthropological, geographical, and historical sources independent of Biblical texts. We know there was a King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon for instance as testified by the excavated remnants of that civilization. There was a King Cyrus of Persia who is praised in the text from Isaiah.

Some 'historical accounts' in the Old and New Testaments cannot so easily be verified and it is rationalized (as Frank put it) that this is the way the writers, writing at a much later time, believed it was or had been taught that it was. Herein we find the myths of the Bible. And most reasoned Biblical scholars also recognize other accounts that are written purely as poetry/psalters/etc. and allegory for the purpose of illustration for a teaching. Much is summized from little pieces of evidence gathered from here and there and compiled much as a scientific theory is compiled. Can anyone really know what life was like for the dinosaurs for instance? No. But by piecing together the bits of evidence, reasoned conclusions can be drawn. Such is the case with the Bible.

But a scholarly analysis is revealing of a culture and beliefs of an ancient group of people.

And it is my belief that such is the case with the Christmas stories. The two writers who chronicle an account of the birth of Jesus contradict each other, and one must summize that much of those accounts are legends that perhaps get skewed a bit over time and through many tellings, but there is no denying that they believed something wonderful happened at that time.

And there is no denying the blessing that the Bible has been to many millions no matter how much it has been distorted and misinterpreted and used in appropriately by both those who hold it in contempt and those who hold it up as the undisputeableWord of God. In other words there are wider perspectives that are quite instructive, useful, and comforting to those who find it difficult to operate on purely blind faith, and the Bible remains a remarkable and lasting work of literature.

0 Replies

The myths and legends of Greece and Rome note that there was a Rome and there was a Greece.

Damn near every work of fiction has factual, historical information in it...and most have plausible plots.

Any reasonable, objective look at the information contained in the Bible would certainly AT VERY LEAST lead one to consider the DISTINCT POSSIBLITY that it is nothing more than a rather fanciful, self-serving history of the early Hebrew existence...and a rather naive mythology about what the REALITY of existence is.

I can understand relatively uneducated, relatively unsophisticated, very superstitious early humans accepting it as a book of fact and revelation...but for people of today to do so is close to laughable.

0 Replies

To fail to recognize the myth, allegory, and writings that are clearly poetry expressing feelings and understanding and nothing more as fact would be at best incorrect, at worst foolish.

And to fail to acknowledge that there is verifiable historical fact contained within it as testified by the quite well educated--all PhD--historians, anthropologists, geologists, sociologists, and archeologists that have spent decades researching this and who have shared their findings with the likes of me would be well....let's be charitable and say just a bit short sighted?

And to fail to accept that many intelligent people have received revelation through reading the Bible is to call them liars with no way to prove the lie.

And here in the season of tidings of peace and joy, I would hope that the religious and the non religious, the pro-Bible and the Bible-is-bunk alike crowds, could accept and appreciate that neither are evil because of their beliefs.

And now I need to hit the shower and go pick up the Christmas turkey and make cookies with my granddaughter.

Merry Christmas all.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

To fail to recognize the myth, allegory, and writings that are clearly poetry expressing feelings and understanding and nothing more as fact would be at best incorrect, at worst foolish.

Don't know of anyone here who has done that!

Quote:

And to fail to acknowledge that there is verifiable historical fact contained within it as testified by the quite well educated--all PhD--historians, anthropologists, geologists, sociologists, and archeologists that have spent decades researching this and who have shared their findings with the likes of me would be well....let's be charitable and say just a bit short sighted?

Don't know of anyone here who has done that.

Quote:

And to fail to accept that many intelligent people have received revelation through reading the Bible is to call them liars with no way to prove the lie.

Don't know of anyone here who has done that.

Quote:

And here in the season of tidings of peace and joy, I would hope that the religious and the non religious, the pro-Bible and the Bible-is-bunk alike crowds, could accept and appreciate that neither are evil because of their beliefs.

Well...there certainly are some theists who have suggested that those of us who do not share their superstitions are evil...but in the spirit of charity...most of us agnostics and atheists overlook those fools.

But aside from those few theists...I don't know of anyone here who has done that.

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL!

And now I need to hit the shower and go pick up the Christmas turkey and make cookies with my granddaughter.

Merry Christmas all.[/quote]

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

And it is my belief that such is the case with the Christmas stories. The two writers who chronicle an account of the birth of Jesus contradict each other, and one must summize that much of those accounts are legends that perhaps get skewed a bit over time and through many tellings, etc.

And with that opinion I have no disagreement.

Foxyre wrote:

And there is no denying the blessing that the Bible has been to many millions no matter how much it has been distorted and misinterpreted and used in appropriately by both those who hold it in contempt and those who hold it up as the undisputeableWord of God. In other words there are wider perspectives that are quite instructive, useful, and comforting to those who find it difficult to operate on purely blind faith, and the Bible remains a remarkable and lasting work of literature.

I have no quarrel with the book itself, as I have iterated; my beef is with those who consider it holy, and force their interpretations of its words on others.

I would have the same bitch about those who might proselytize "Star Wars" or "The Lord of the Rings" as gospel.

BTW, the word "summize" you use twice does not exist in English. I believe you may mean surmise ('a thought or idea based on scanty evidence'; i.e. conjecture), or alternately, summarize (to tell or reduce to a summary, from Merriam-Webster.)

0 Replies

Point to Fox and her claims in this here thread and the post recounting the outcome of the story it was about.

And here's my take on it.

0 Replies

You and I see pretty much eye to eye on this issue I think Nimh. I presume you are not religious? It doesn't matter. I am one of the 'fools' who does believe and I have been blessed by virtue of my belief. I do not think the God I pray to or my belief is affected in any way by the presence of a Bible or a statue featuring the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, nor am I affected in any way by the lack of a Bible or any other book or any other statue in a courthouse or other public building.

Since the beginning of recorded history however, humankind has used symbols and art depicting various religious expression and images. Most do not relate in any way to my particular religious faith but I can appreciate them for what they are: works of art. If somebody else does find them personally meaningful, I cannot see how that is any kind of affront or disrespect to me.

What is disrespectful to me is for the non-religious or those of a different faith system to attempt to deny others to have and enjoy those symbols or works of art that are meaningful to them.

I would fight for anybody's right to practice his/her particular faith and also for anybody else to not be required to appreciate or practice my particular faith or any other faith. The government should have no power to require anyone to believe or not believe or to grant any reward or impose any consequence for what any of us believe or express or do not believe or express in matters of religion.

I understand those who object to having somebody in their face pushing some religious sect or principle. I don't like that either.

But I cannot help but think the angry athiest who is so vehemently opposed to exposure to anything religious or who holds those who are religious in such contempt as anything other than intolerantly and judgmentally religious. I think the truly nonreligious are not bothered by any of it and view religion as just one more human quirk like preference for rap over country or prefering mashed potatoes to french fries.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I presume you are not religious?

No, I'm not. Have never even read anything from the Bible, tho I hear it's a great piece of literature.

Foxfyre wrote:

I do not think the God I pray to or my belief is affected in any way by the presence of a Bible or a statue featuring the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, nor am I affected in any way by the lack of a Bible or any other book or any other statue in a courthouse or other public building.

Since the beginning of recorded history however, humankind has used symbols and art depicting various religious expression and images. Most do not relate in any way to my particular religious faith but I can appreciate them for what they are: works of art. If somebody else does find them personally meaningful, I cannot see how that is any kind of affront or disrespect to me.

What is disrespectful to me is for the non-religious or those of a different faith system to attempt to deny others to have and enjoy those symbols or works of art that are meaningful to them.

Yes, we do see eye to eye on this issue. You formulate it very well.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

well it is kinda confusing, on the one hand we have peeps clamoring for a return to the spirit of christmas (I'm guessing the religious part about jesus birth and all that) vs the others who clamor for "goodwill to men" kinda secular stuff. On top of all that we have the "marketing of xmas" buy your love a miracle (diamond ring) countered with feed the homeless but remember the 3 wisemen, no babe left unswaddled, and then and THEN we have a commie pinko santa in a RED suit "giving" away presents. Damn, I love a parade.

Confusing to who? To you? I understand and relate to being put off by all the glitz and hype, but confused? Or are you lamenting the confusion to the kids?

0 Replies

Is there room for Christmas anymore?:

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know