Okay, the actual title of his book is Holy Fable:Vol. One but I like to cut to the chase as the saying goes. I'll be posting excerpts from the work. The first deals with "David and Goliath." A cute story and total bullshit.
QuoteDavid and Goliath 1 Sam. 17 According to 1 Samuel 17: 55-58, David and Saul meet here for the first time, on the eve of the battle with the Philistine champion Goliath. 78 David is a youth unaccustomed to either armor or battle. Yet according to chapter 16, Saul and David had already met, and David was already a skilled warrior by the time of chapter 17. The chapter 16 version must be the earlier of the Saul-David meeting, since it is the less spectacular compared with the David and Goliath version. If you already had the Goliath version, who would ever have made up the less spectacular one in chapter 16? But if that is what you started out with, you might welcome a new, more colorful version. They both survived in the tradition side by side. And, according to 2 Samuel 21: 19, it is not David but someone named Elhanan who kills Goliath! So we must conclude that the feat was only later ascribed to the more famous hero David. The David and Goliath story as we read it in 1 Samuel 17 must be a legend. As such it is another prime bit of Deuteronomic theology: God’s power is shown in human weakness. (But again, isn’t the point really that brains trump brawn?) Interestingly, the much later Chronicler, who rewrote the Deuteronomic History, noticed this discrepancy and made Elhanan kill Goliath’s brother (1 Chron. 20: 5)! Subsequent Bible copyists liked the Chronicler’s harmonization so well that they inserted it into the text of Samuel, which is why it appears that way in the late, corrupt text of the King James Version at 2 Samuel 21: 19. Similarly, the Septuagint translators noticed the contradiction between the two versions of the first meeting of Saul and David, and they eliminated one of them! Finally, note that Goliath’s stature has literally grown in the telling. According to the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls texts, he is six and a half feet tall, not nine and a half feet tall as the corrupt Masoretic Text has it.
Pgs 112-113
Prof. Israel Finkelstein has a good take on this tale, too. But I'll stick with Price for the moment.
Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. Expand your mind.
Yes, Dr Finkelstein is good.
That's what Price is doing. Fundies will explode at the mere suggestion that their holy horseshit is.... well.... holey.
Quote from: Minimalist on December 30, 2018, 03:13:23 PM
That's what Price is doing. Fundies will explode at the mere suggestion that their holy horseshit is.... well.... holey.
Infallible and inerrant scripture .. is shooting fish in a barrel. Do you lake fish with dynamite? Is that sporting?
I have no objection to picking off people who do. Frankly, I'm amazed that in the 21st century there are still people who take that shit at face value.
Quote from: Joseph LewisIt is our duty to expose the Bible. We must continue to tell the truth about the Bible. We must continue to enlighten the people. And if after the true facts are known, there are some who still insist the Bible is good enough for them, they are welcome to it.
I'm familiar with
Robert Price, he's one of my favorite people.
The reason the OT is so contradictory is that it was created from several different documents, according to the
documentary hypothesis.
Does Price discuss this at all in his book,
Holy Crap, Batman?
Should be Holy Shit, Batman.
Quote from: Minimalist on December 30, 2018, 04:44:54 PM
I have no objection to picking off people who do. Frankly, I'm amazed that in the 21st century there are still people who take that shit at face value.
Apparently you don't get out much. Also with each generational turnover, we have a whole new set of fucking assholes to deal with ;-)
Robert M. Price is one of my favs. I last read his Jesus Christ the Incredible Shrinking Son of Man--loved it but it was a long time ago. I have several other publications of The Journal of Higher Criticisms and read some of his Jesus Seminar stuff. I should get the book you are referring to--should get back into the guy.
Quote from: Baruch on December 30, 2018, 07:08:12 PM
Apparently you don't get out much. Also with each generational turnover, we have a whole new set of fucking assholes to deal with ;-)
The good news is that jesusism is dying out in the West. It's an aging population of shitheads that show up at the churches, on occasion.
Quote from: Minimalist on December 30, 2018, 08:38:08 PM
The good news is that jesusism is dying out in the West. It's an aging population of shitheads that show up at the churches, on occasion.
In Europe and Canada etc ... not so much in the US. The cynical upper class of any country though, is never genuine in anything.
I got interested in Biblical criticism because of my wife's seminary education. One of her professors was a member of the Jesus Seminar ...
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/art_jesus_sem_hist_bel.htm
That was 20 years ago. From there I moved onto "original languages" ... as religious anthropology.
We're getting there.
https://bigthink.com/stephen-johnson/the-us-is-losing-its-religion-and-faster-than-you-may-think
We had a longer way to come, sadly.
Quote from: Minimalist on December 30, 2018, 10:38:51 PM
We're getting there.
https://bigthink.com/stephen-johnson/the-us-is-losing-its-religion-and-faster-than-you-may-think
We had a longer way to come, sadly.
People, when free of parental influence, choose their religion or lack thereof, based on their psychology. There are 16 personality types (per Meyer-Briggs).
See, the ultimate genocide is the extermination of 15 of the Meyer-Briggs personality types by the Master personality type? The only question is which of the 16 is the master.
So no, you will never get rid of X, no matter what that X is, and no matter how much you hate X. The problem isn't with X, the problem is with you.
BTW ... US is pretty religious, as always ... just more diverse in theism ...
http://www.pewforum.org/2018/04/25/when-americans-say-they-believe-in-god-what-do-they-mean/
Comparing younger adults to older adults is a false comparison, because people's religion changes with age.
I don't know..... lots of old farts in this congregation.
(http://www.yellowlakelutheranchurch.org/uploads/6/2/7/7/62770397/1560212.jpg?960)
Last one out can turn off the lights.
Then there is this:
https://www.infowars.com/between-6000-and-10000-churches-in-the-u-s-are-dying-each-year-and-that-means-that-over-100-will-die-this-week/
(I deliberately chose Infowars to make the point!)
QuoteAs you will see below, between 6,000 and 10,000 churches are dying in the United States every single year, and that means that more than 100 will die this week alone. And of course thousands of others are on life support. All over the country this weekend, small handfuls of people will gather in huge buildings which once boasted very large congregations. At one time, America was widely considered to be “a Christian nationâ€, but that really isn’t true anymore.
Depending on location most of them should be torn down and converted to what this country really needs: More parking.
America was never "a Christian nation" - just a holier-than-thou nation. I'm enjoying the decline of religion. I hardly ever hear anyone mention it, anymore, since I don't stay at the local gospel mission these days. There are two churches that have a breakfast for the homeless every Saturday and Sunday, but the most they ever do is pray before the meal. Well, they only do that at the Church of the Incarnation. The other is the local Unitarian church, and they don't seem to pray at all, ever.
I don't know..... lots of old farts in this congregation.
(http://www.yellowlakelutheranchurch.org/uploads/6/2/7/7/62770397/1560212.jpg?960)
Last one out can turn off the lights.
Then there is this:
https://www.infowars.com/between-6000-and-10000-churches-in-the-u-s-are-dying-each-year-and-that-means-that-over-100-will-die-this-week/
(I deliberately chose Infowars to make the point!)
QuoteAs you will see below, between 6,000 and 10,000 churches are dying in the United States every single year, and that means that more than 100 will die this week alone. And of course thousands of others are on life support. All over the country this weekend, small handfuls of people will gather in huge buildings which once boasted very large congregations. At one time, America was widely considered to be “a Christian nationâ€, but that really isn’t true anymore.
Depending on location most of them should be torn down and converted to what this country really needs: More parking.
Quote from: Unbeliever on December 31, 2018, 01:25:29 PM
America was never "a Christian nation" - just a holier-than-thou nation. I'm enjoying the decline of religion. I hardly ever hear anyone mention it, anymore, since I don't stay at the local gospel mission these days. There are two churches that have a breakfast for the homeless every Saturday and Sunday, but the most they ever do is pray before the meal. Well, they only do that at the Church of the Incarnation. The other is the local Unitarian church, and they don't seem to pray at all, ever.
I suspect, but you may prove me wrong. That you have enjoyed the decline in civility and morality. Not that churches uphold such things.
in American culture churches have functioned as alternatives to other social gatherings such as bars and political rallies. I find the latter two ... problematic also.
Unitarians are different. But you knew that. Most Unitarian congregations are non-Abrahamic today. Regular Christian groups may be sanctimonious ;-(
IMHO ... I believe it is illegal in most jurisdictions to be homeless. It is called vagrancy. Kind of brands you as a gypsy. Not that the law is right.
The Supreme Court struck down vagrancy laws in 1983. They ruled that it gave the police virtually an unlimited right to determine who could or could not walk the streets.
Today, as you know, the cops do not bother with such formalities. They simply shoot anyone they don't like.
Quote from: Minimalist on January 01, 2019, 03:47:33 PM
The Supreme Court struck down vagrancy laws in 1983. They ruled that it gave the police virtually an unlimited right to determine who could or could not walk the streets.
Today, as you know, the cops do not bother with such formalities. They simply shoot anyone they don't like.
In actual practice, cops in California and New Mexico don't care what the SCOTUS says. Vagrants who are not even dangerous, are routinely roughed up and even killed. Your law is helpless to protect you in a bar fight.
Why do you think I rail against the fucking cops?
Quote from: Minimalist on January 01, 2019, 05:06:40 PM
Why do you think I rail against the fucking cops?
But what does agonizing get you? Have you been personally assaulted? I hope not.
Do you require personal assault to be outraged by injustice? If so, I pity you.
Quote from: Minimalist on January 01, 2019, 11:41:44 PM
Do you require personal assault to be outraged by injustice? If so, I pity you.
OK, but +7 billion injustices per day .. how do you have time to sleep, take a defecation etc. Seems masochistic to me.
I don't hear about all of them. That helps.
Quote from: Minimalist on January 02, 2019, 11:26:42 AM
I don't hear about all of them. That helps.
The Internet ... that doesn't help. That is why the whole world is different from a generation ago. Monkeys can handle a banana, but not the Internet.
Well, back to the point of the thread, here are a couple of good quotes:
Quote from: Lemuel K. WashburnOf all the great inventions and discoveries that go to make human life easier, happier, more rich and glorious, not one can be laid to the work of theology. These triumphs all belong to science…. If man had no knowledge except what was got out of the Bible he would not know enough to make a shoe.
Quote from: Robert G. IngersollIf a man would follow, today, the teachings of the Old Testament, he would be a criminal. If he would follow strictly the teachings of the New, he would be insane.
I wish more people would read the Bible, they'd be a lot less likely to believe it's a "holy book."
Quote from: Unbeliever on January 02, 2019, 01:15:18 PM
Well, back to the point of the thread, here are a couple of good quotes:
I wish more people would read the Bible, they'd be a lot less likely to believe it's a "holy book."
Ironically preaching to the choir?
But don't forget that other scripture ... The Communist Manifesto ;-)
If you call it "scripture" does that mean you think it was God-breathed, according to 2 Timothy 3:16-17?
Quote from: Baruch on January 02, 2019, 12:52:53 PM
The Internet ... that doesn't help. That is why the whole world is different from a generation ago. Monkeys can handle a banana, but not the Internet.
You know what else doesn't help, B? Cable news and satellite TV. Remember the Indian Ocean tsunami? That played out in real time all across the world. But if you went back 200 years - a tick of the clock in geological terms - who would have known? A tsunami in the open ocean might not even be detectable by a sailing ship and they certainly would not know the extent of it unless they were visiting multiple ports of call and found each of them smashed. Then how long to sail back to Europe to report the news if they did realize it?
Ted Turner changed all that. Now we know when shit happens at once.
Quote from: Unbeliever on January 02, 2019, 01:23:05 PM
If you call it "scripture" does that mean you think it was God-breathed, according to 2 Timothy 3:16-17?
Yes paper mâché Marx ... definitely a god you can follow, if you want to. Just stay away from matches, your head is flammable.
Back to the point:
QuoteThe very existence of King David is fully as dubious as that of King Arthur. It’s not that such an epic hero couldn’t have existed in reality. After all, there’s Alexander the Great. The trouble is that no trace remains of David’s palace or even of Jerusalem as a royal city. 101 So what was the purpose or the motive for the creation of David’s epic? Here’s a speculation: I wonder if the whole business was a fiction designed to enhance the credentials of Zerubbabel, the Jewish governor under the Persian Empire, who prided himself on his belonging to the house of David (Ezra 5: 2; Hagg. 1: 1; 2: 21-23; 4: 6-10). 102 I’m suggesting that he (and possibly other descendants of some nondescript man named David) fabricated an epic starring not the “David of history†(whoever he might have been) but the “David of faith,†i.e., of propaganda, just as the Roman historian Livy made the mythic hero Aeneas, heroic refugee from Troy, the progenitor of the house of Iulus, from which Julius Caesar sprang. 103 But there is reason to think there had never been any historical David. The name means “Beloved,†a divine epithet. 104 It was applied to the David character as God’s favorite, as if he had been named (by the author, not by his parents) in view of his narrative role, which he probably was. 105 David would seem to be another case of an ancient deity being reduced to a legendary hero. 106 But couldn’t parents name their son “David†to mark their love for their infant? Sure. But there is no one else with the name David in the Bible, implying it was not considered an appropriate name for mortal man.
Price, Robert M.. Holy Fable: The Old Testament Undistorted by Faith (p. 118). Tellectual Press. Kindle Edition.
Correct. King David is legendary. There is evidence of "house of David" .. but that isn't the only way it reads, if you read Hebrew. David = Beloved. So it could read "house of beloved" ... which might be a whore house, instead of a government office ;-)
Tear down every scripture? Fine with me. Burn all the books, like a good Nazi?
Correct about the meaning of "David" or "DVD" in Hebrew. Of course, the Tel Dan stele is written in Aramaic not Hebrew and as such had dots as word dividers. There is no dot between Bet and DVD which according to scholar George Athas makes it a toponym or a place name. We cannot be sure about the usage or even if it refers to some sort of god or legendary hero. But Rome and Athens were both named after patron deities so there is precedent.
Ancient writing is always ambiguous ... until about 1000 years ago, there was almost no division into separate words or sentences. Derrida took his philosophy from biblical hermeneutics by rabbis, that all text interpretation is a "reading in" of the ego of the reader into a performance (the combination of the text and reader). This is essentially true. Without a reader interpreting the text, the text is lifeless. You have to add a reader (life) to bring it alive. An essential underlying POV to Johannine Gospel (Jesus as Word/Reason).
Basically writing was "stream of letters from a stream of consciousness" ... a kind of phonetic tape recorder of a spoken utterance. The Bible wasn't even divided into chapters and verses until then. A Biblical book is simply the length of a physical scroll. The codex (booklet) inspired the need for books (chapters). Actual pauses during performance (spoken writing) are part of the poetics and rhetoric of it. The Bible wasn't meant to be read, it was meant to be heard, and heard by someone whose primary language was Hebrew-Aramaic or Greek.
Scholars get this completely wrong. Gnostic practice (which is where religion comes from) involves hearing over sight (aka Mantra Yoga) and emotions over thought (aka Bhakti Yoga). If is essentially feminine, with the feminine male being "complete", just as the masculine female is "complete" (see final aphorisms in the Gospel of Thomas). Neil Douglas-Klotz is the only author today who understands this ... he emphasizes he Aramaic tradition over the Hebrew/Greek, and Gnosis over dry scholarship.
Agree with one slight quibble.
Scholars fully understand the auditory nature. Literacy in the ancient world was so low that writings literally had to be read aloud to the crowds by the handful of people who could actually read/write. And one must always make allowances for the degree of literacy. While perhaps 10% of the Athenian population could read Greek most would have been merchants and tradesmen keeping business records. For the relative handful who could read sophisticated stuff like Plato or Aristotle the number would have been far lower.
Some degree of literacy in Latin in the West may have been higher because the Roman army taught basic literacy to the legionaries for military purposes. But again the ability to read a duty roster to see who was supposed to clean the latrines is somewhat less than reading the Aeneid or Livy's History. And anyway, the preferred language of the Roman elite was Greek presumably to set them apart from the Great Unwashed!
We see this phenomenon today. There are people who are classified as functionally illiterate. They can get a driver's license and read road signs but filling out a job application is beyond them.
Quote from: Minimalist on January 04, 2019, 11:00:05 AM
Agree with one slight quibble.
Scholars fully understand the auditory nature. Literacy in the ancient world was so low that writings literally had to be read aloud to the crowds by the handful of people who could actually read/write. And one must always make allowances for the degree of literacy. While perhaps 10% of the Athenian population could read Greek most would have been merchants and tradesmen keeping business records. For the relative handful who could read sophisticated stuff like Plato or Aristotle the number would have been far lower.
Some degree of literacy in Latin in the West may have been higher because the Roman army taught basic literacy to the legionaries for military purposes. But again the ability to read a duty roster to see who was supposed to clean the latrines is somewhat less than reading the Aeneid or Livy's History. And anyway, the preferred language of the Roman elite was Greek presumably to set them apart from the Great Unwashed!
We see this phenomenon today. There are people who are classified as functionally illiterate. They can get a driver's license and read road signs but filling out a job application is beyond them.
All scholars ... are like a man who has never had sex with a woman, but can recite the Kinsey Report to you.
Gershon Scholem was the greatest scholar of Kabbalah in recent times. But he was an atheist Jew, who didn't practice Kabbalah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gershom_Scholem
Socrates was right, books are the death of true intelligence. It is a lived experience. Scholarship is just bureaucracy.
It beats ignorance.
Quote from: Minimalist on January 04, 2019, 02:33:27 PM
It beats ignorance.
Life beats death. Why choose death? Books don't make you smart. Burn them all!
Socratic learning from another living person, that is education.
Depends heavily on who the other person is, wouldn't you say?
Quote from: Minimalist on January 04, 2019, 09:20:49 PM
Depends heavily on who the other person is, wouldn't you say?
Of course. Choose carefully. They say .... when the student is ready, the teacher appears. Mostly people aren't ready, except for bedtime.
Quote from: Minimalist on December 30, 2018, 01:52:20 PM
Okay, the actual title of his book is Holy Fable:Vol. One but I like to cut to the chase as the saying goes. I'll be posting excerpts from the work. The first deals with "David and Goliath." A cute story and total bullshit.
Prof. Israel Finkelstein has a good take on this tale, too. But I'll stick with Price for the moment.
But I suggest the christian text is even less factual that that, being almost wholly made up from bits and fragments of older religions stolen and incorporated shamelessly into a conflation of self-contradictory stories and concepts.
I do actually appreciate how ancient people tried to comprehend their world partly from current experiences and struggles against invaders (or being invaders themselves). I can accept that legends from previous ages (like the flooding of the Black Sea) gave rise to false stories of Noah's Flood. And why NOTt imagine an origin myth like the garden of Eden (when you don't have any actual facts to go on).
What annoys the crap out of ME is that people still treat those ancient myths as REAL! Come ON people. take a course in ancient anthropology... Read some facts, study old fossils. Stop being so damn gullible.
Correct. Even the Bible says ... "nothing new under the Sun" ;-)
Plagiarism is a sign of good taste. A truly innovative writing would by this time be just a random list of letters, even worse than that no-caps poet, e e cummings.